SPRING2013

SPRING2019

CIRCUIT BREAKER
AND TRANSDUCER:
WHERE DO I CONNECT?

SF6—THE ALTERNATIVE GAS PAGE 58

NEW PRODUCT FORUM PAGE 114

ISS N 2 1 6 7 -35 9 4 N ETA WO R LD J O UR N A L PR I N T
ISS N 2 1 6 7 -35 8 6 N ETA WO R LD J O UR N A L O N LI N E
INDUSTRY TOPICS

THE VALUE OF
PERFORMING
POWER
FACTOR SWEEP
MEASUREMENTS
ON
BUSHINGS
BY BRANDON DUP UIS, OMICRON

Power factor measurement has long been accepted as an invaluable tool for
identifying insulation defects such as aging, deterioration, moisture ingress,
and localized failures involving the winding and bushing insulation of a
power transformer. Historically, power factor measurements have been
performed at a single test frequency (typically 60Hz) and at a single test
voltage (typically 10kV). However, modern test instruments can perform
power factor measurements at several different test frequencies and at
several different test voltages with minimal additional time and effort.

Based on experience, performing power • Better assess the condition of an insulation

factor frequency sweep and voltage sweep
measurements can help identify and confirm:
• Compromised insulation
• User error
• Influence of the test environment
Power factor sweep measurements help the
industry:
system
• Determine whether a given power factor
measurement is even valid
Power factor measurement is highly sensitive
to the test environment — for example, it is
sensitive to moisture on the surfaces of the
bushings during the time of the test, to the test
connections, and to the test specimen’s earth-

2 • SPRING 2019 THE VALUE OF PERFORMING POWER FACTOR SWEEP MEASUREMENTS ON BUSHINGS

ground connection — so a simple tool that
allows a user to better detect a bad power factor
measurement is useful.
Although power factor sweep measurements can
be performed on the overall winding insulation
of a power transformer, this paper focuses on the
benefits of applying sweep measurements to the
C1 insulation of bushings. While power factor
sweep measurements are not the silver bullet of
power factor testing, they can be beneficial for
the maintenance testing industry.
W H O C A N B E NE F IT
F ROM P E R FORM ING
PO W E R FAC T OR S W E E P
M E A S U R E ME NT S?
Power factor measurement is highly sensitive.
Therefore, obtaining correct (i.e., valid) power
factor measurements in the field is challenging.
In many cases, a questionable power factor
measurement is not caused by compromised
insulation, but is due to either user error or the
influence of the test environment.
Unfortunately, an invalid measurement is
often not identified until the user leaves the job
site, places the transformer back into service,
and returns to the office. The user often has
only a short window of time to test a power
transformer — only one shot to obtain the
correct measurements.
The Test Equipment Operator
Invalid power factor measurements that
go undetected are a significant waste of a
company’s resources. Although it is difficult for
the user to determine whether a power factor
measurement at one test voltage and one test
frequency is valid, invalid measurements often
become obvious when the power factor sweep
measurements are performed and analyzed.
Therefore, the test equipment operator should
use power factor sweep measurements as a
tool to quickly identify and correct invalid or
questionable measurements before they leave
the job site with incorrect test results.
THE VALUE OF PERFORMING POWER FACTOR SWEEP MEASUREMENTS ON BUSHINGS
INDUSTRY TOPICS
The Engineer
In most cases, a test equipment operator
performs power factor measurements in the
field and distributes a test report to an engineer,
who assesses the test results in the office. Based
on the results, the engineer is responsible for
assessing the condition of the insulation system
to determine the appropriate course of action.
A disconnect often exists between the test
equipment operator and the engineer. In
most cases, the engineer is not on site when
the measurements are performed, making it
difficult to be confident that the measurements
are valid. However, an engineer who has the
power factor sweep results in hand can better
identify invalid measurements, which helps
prevent an incorrect condition assessment.
It is widely known that the best way to assess
a power factor measurement is to compare the
most recent measurement to a series of previous
baseline measurements that were obtained at
consistent test intervals. However, many asset
owners do not have a collection of reliable baseline
test results for their transformer fleet, which
makes assessing the condition of an insulation
system and determining the appropriate course
of action a challenge. Fortunately, power factor
sweep measurements can be used to better assess
the condition of an insulation system at a given
point in time, especially when there are no
historical test results for comparison.
POWER FACTOR SWEEP
TEST ANALYSI S
Analysis of voltage sweep and frequency sweep
measurements is performed visually. The power
factor measurements are plotted versus the
applied test voltage and versus the applied test
frequency, and the condition of the insulation
is assessed based on the shape of the plots (aka,
the traces). Although this paper focuses on
applying power factor sweep measurements
to the C1 insulation system of bushings, the
same analysis strategies are valid for assessing
power factor sweep measurements performed
on the overall winding insulation of a power
NETAWORLD • 3
INDUSTRY TOPICS
transformer. In general, the analysis involves
determining whether the shape of a trace is
normal or abnormal. If either of the sweep
measurements produces an abnormal trace, the
insulation system should be investigated and/or
tested more frequently in the future.
Power Factor Voltage Sweep
Test (aka Voltage Tip-Up Test)
Performing a power factor measurement at
multiple test voltages helps identify compromised
insulation as well as invalid power factor
measurements. At a minimum, an oil-and-paper
insulation system should be tested at two test
voltages (e.g., 2kV and 10kV). In most cases,
a power factor measurement performed on
bushing insulation should not be voltage sensitive.
Therefore, regardless of the applied test voltage, the
measured power factor value should be the same.
If the measured power factor value is not
reasonably similar compared to the same power
factor measurement at a different voltage, the
measurement is questionable and should be
investigated. To investigate further, the power
factor measurement can be repeated at four
or five different test voltages (e.g., 2kV, 4kV,
6kV, 8kV, and 10kV) to establish a definitive
pattern.
When a power factor measurement is invalid,
it often becomes voltage sensitive. Therefore, a
power factor measurement at two different test
PF fequency sweep
0.7
0.65
0.6
0.55
pF
0.50
%
0.45
0.4 H1 H2 H3
0.35
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400
Hz
Figure 1: Acceptable C1 Power Factor Frequency Sweep Traces
4 • SPRING 2019 THE VALUE OF PERFORMING POWER FACTOR SWEEP MEASUREMENTS ON BUSHINGS
PF fequency sweep
voltages — first at a relatively low test voltage
(e.g., 1kV or 2kV) and then at a relatively high
test voltage (e.g., 10kV) — can detect invalid
measurements better than a single power factor
measurement at one test voltage.
When the insulation of a bushing begins to
deteriorate, the C1 power factor measurement
for that bushing often becomes voltage
sensitive. Therefore, at a minimum, a bushing
C1 power factor measurement should be
performed at two different test voltages
(e.g., 2kV and 10kV). If the power factor
value obtained at the two test voltages is not
reasonably similar, then the C1 insulation of
the bushing is typically deemed questionable.
Remember, however, that a few bushing types
may produce C1 power factor measurements
that are slightly voltage sensitive even when the
C1 insulation system of the bushing is healthy.
The Power Factor Frequency
Sweep Test
Performing a power factor measurement at
multiple test frequencies helps to identify
compromised insulation and invalid
measurements. The power factor frequency
sweep test involves performing power factor
measurements at a series of various test
frequencies (e.g., 15Hz, 30Hz, 45Hz, 60Hz,
150Hz, 200Hz, 300Hz, and 400Hz).
The general guidelines used to assess a
frequency sweep trace (Figure 1) are as follows:
Cap. fequency sweep
• In general, if an oil-and-paper insulation
480
system is healthy, the measured power
factor value increases versus frequency. In
460
other words, the frequency sweep trace
440
climbs uphill versus frequency.
420
•400
As an oil-and-paper insulation system
380
deteriorates, the frequency sweep trace
360 H1
typically becomes flat, or worse, decreases H2 H3
340
versus frequency. If the trace decreases
versus frequency throughout all or most of
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
the frequency sweep, then the insulation
Hz
system is typically considered questionable
and is either investigated further and/or

tested more frequently in the future.
• Another characteristic of compromised
insulation is a distinct fishhook shape in
the lower frequency range of the sweep
(i.e., at frequencies below 60Hz). If this
occurs, the insulation system is typically
considered questionable and is investigated
further and/or tested more frequently in
the future.
• One advantage of performing power factor
frequency sweep measurements on the C1
insulation system of a bushing is that, in
most cases, a bushing mounted on a power
transformer has two or three similar-unit
bushings that can be tested and compared
to each other. In general, power factor
sweep measurements should behave
similarly when comparing similar-unit
bushings. Ideally, the traces for similar-unit
bushings overlay or overlap when plotted
against each other. Most important, the
shape of the frequency sweep traces should
INDUSTRY TOPICS
Case Study #1: Haefely 115kV
Bushings
The first case involves power factor
measurements that were performed on three
Haefely 115kV bushings (Figure 2).
Based on the results in Figure 2, the 10kV
power factor for H3 is higher than its
nameplate value, whereas the 10kV power
factor for the other two bushings is below their
respective nameplate values. Notice that the
2kV and 10kV power factor measurements
for the H3 bushing are dissimilar. In contrast,
the 2kV and 10kV power factor measurements
for the H1 and H2 bushings are reasonably
similar, which further suggests that the H3
measurements are abnormal.
When comparing the power factor frequency
PF fequency sweep
sweep traces among similar-unit bushings, the
shape0.7
of the traces should be reasonably similar. 480
460
0.65 the shape of the H3 trace is dissimilar
Clearly,
440
0.6 to the traces of the other two bushings.
relative
420
0.55
Moreover, the H3 trace decreases versus

pF
be reasonably similar when comparing 400
0.50
%

similar-unit bushings. If the shape of the 0.45 115kV BUSHINGS (2000) 380
HAEFELY
trace of one bushing is dissimilar relative to 0.4 H1 H2 H3 360
the shape of the traces of the other similar- 2kV Power 10kV Power 10kV PF – Nameplate
0.35 Factor Factor 2kV PF 340
Power Factor
unit bushings, then the dissimilar bushing
should be investigated further and/or H1 0 0.34%
50 100 150 0.34% 0.00%
200 250 300 350 400 0.38% 0 50
tested more frequently in the future. H2 0.32% Hz
0.32% 0.00% 0.37%
H3 0.38% 0.41% 0.03% 0.35%
The C1 power factor frequency sweep
*Note, the measured capacitance for each bushing compared well to its respec-
measurements for three sister-unit bushings are tive nameplate value
provided in Figure 1. Notice that the shape of
the traces is similar when comparing the similar- PF fequency sweep
unit bushings, and in all the traces in Figure
0.6
1, the measured power factor increases versus
0.55 H1 H2 H3
frequency (from left-to-right). This is typically
indicative of healthy insulation. 0.5
0.45
%

0.4
C A S E S T U DIE S
0.35
Several case studies involving power factor 0.3
sweep measurements helped identify
0.25
both compromised insulation and invalid
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400
measurements and demonstrated the value of Hz
performing power factor sweep tests on the C1
insulation of a bushing. Figure 2: C1 Power Factor Results for Three Haefely 115kV Bushings

THE VALUE OF PERFORMING POWER FACTOR SWEEP MEASUREMENTS ON BUSHINGS NETAWORLD

PF fequency sweep • 5

0.38
INDUSTRY TOPICS
frequency and has the distinctive fish-hook
PF fequency sweep Cap. fequency sweep
in the lower frequency range; this is typically
0.7 indicative of compromised insulation. 480
0.65 460
0.6 Interestingly, the 10kV power factor for440 H3
0.55 is below 1.5 to 2 times its nameplate value,420

pF
0.50 which the industry generally considers400to
%

0.45 be acceptable. However, the H3 bushing 380is

0.4 clearly behaving
H1 differently
H2 H3 than the other two
360 H1 H2 H3
0.35
similar bushings, which is cause for concern.
340
This case demonstrates that power factor
0 50 100 sweep
150 200 measurements
250 300 are 350 more
400 sensitive to 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400
compromised
Hz insulation than conventional Hz
10kV power factor measurements. The H3
bushing should be flagged as the weak link
among the three bushings, and if returned to
service, should be tested more frequently to Bushings are a necessary component of a power
gauge the severity of the situation. transformer, but they are one of the transformer’s
PF fequency sweep
main weaknesses.
0.6
0.55 Case Study #2: Lapp POC The power factor frequency sweep trace for the
H1 H2 H3
0.5
Series 2 115kV Bushings H3 bushing is not plotted because its 10kV
The second case involves power factor power factor value is three times its nameplate
0.45
measurements performed on three Lapp POC value, which is already enough to condemn the
%

0.4
Series 2 115kV bushings (Figure 3). H3 bushing. In other words, the power factor
0.35
frequency sweep trace for the H3 bushing only
0.3 confirms what we already know. Additionally,
LAPP POC SERIES 2 115kV BUSHINGS
0.25 the 2kV and 10kV power factor values for
0 2kV Power
50 10010kV150
Power 200 10kV
250 PF – 300 Nameplate
350 400 the H3 bushing differ significantly — further
Factor Factor Hz 2kV PF Power Factor
evidence to condemn the H3 bushing.
H1 0.27% 0.28% 0.01% 0.25%
H2 0.25% 0.25% 0.00% 0.25% Based on the results in Figure 3, the 10kV
H3 0.66% 0.76% 0.10% 0.24% power factor value for H1 is higher than its
nameplate value, whereas the 10kV power
PF fequency sweep
factor value for the H2 bushing is the same
0.38 as its nameplate value. Additionally, the
0.36 H1 H2 frequency sweep trace for the H1 bushing is
0.34
clearly dissimilar relative to the frequency
0.32
0.30
sweep trace for the H2 bushing. The H1 trace
decreases versus frequency and has developed
%

0.28
0.26 the distinctive fish-hook in the low-frequency
0.24 range — typically indicative of compromised
0.22 insulation. Although the 10kV power factor for
H1 is well below 1.5 to 2 times its nameplate
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400
Hz value, the H1 bushing is clearly behaving
differently than the H2 bushing. As a result, the
Figure 3: C1 Power Factor Results for Lapp POC Series 2 115kV H1 bushing should be tested more frequently
Bushings to gauge the severity of the situation.

PF fequency sweep Cap. at 60.00 Hz

6 • SPRING 2019 THE VALUE OF PERFORMING POWER FACTOR SWEEP MEASUREMENTS ON BUSHINGS

1.6 200
 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400
Hz Hz
INDUSTRY TOPICS
Case Study #3: Westinghouse to the other sister-unit bushings. For this
Electric Type S 37kV Bushings type of insulation failure, in addition to the
PF fequency sweep measured capacitance (pF) value being different
The third case involves power factor
0.6 than expected, the power factor frequency
measurements performed on three
sweep trace becomes more-or-less linear and
Westinghouse
0.55 Electric Type-S H1 37kV H2 H3 a steep incline from left-to-right (as
exhibits
bushings.
0.5 The power factor measurements are
demonstrated by the H3 bushing in Figure 4).
summarized
0.45 in Figure 4.
%

0.4 Interestingly, the H1 and H2 bushings tested

This case provides an example of three sister- with capacitance (PF) values well below their
0.35
unit bushings that produced three completely respective nameplate values; the capacitance
0.3 power factor frequency sweep traces.
different value of the H3 bushing is above its nameplate
0.25
The power factor frequency sweep trace for value. If the measurements provided in Figure 4
0
the H1 bushing 50is a typical
100 example
150 200 250
of a trace 300 350 400
can be verified, the insulation system of the H3
Hz
produced by a healthy bushing, whereas the bushing is suspect, and if returned to service,
power factor frequency sweep trace for the should be tested more frequently to gauge the
H2 bushing is a typical example of a trace severity of the situation.
produced by a questionable bushing. However,
the power factor frequency sweep trace for
the H3 bushing is an example PF of fequency sweep
an abnormal Case Study #4: Lapp POC
or 0.38
non-typical frequency sweep trace, which 138kV Bushings
warrants
0.36 concern. H1 H2 This case involves power factor measurements
0.34 performed on three Lapp POC 138kV
Based
0.32 on experience, there appears to be a bushings (Figure 5).
0.30 insulation failure mode where the
bushing
%

0.28
measured capacitance (pF) value of the bushing Based on the results in Figure 5, the power
0.26
is dissimilar relative to its nameplate value and factor values for all three bushings are higher
0.24
0.22
WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC TYPE S 37kV BUSHINGS
02kV Power
50 100 150
10kV Power 20010kV250
PF – 300Nameplate
350 400 Measured Nameplate
Factor Factor Hz 2kV PF Power Factor Capacitance Capacitance
H1 0.60% 0.58% -0.02% 0.65% 169pF 182pF
H2 0.79% 0.78% -0.01% 0.72% 184pF 197pF
H3 0.69% 0.69% 0.00% 0.66% 203pF 198pF

PF fequency sweep Cap. at 60.00 Hz

1.6 200
1.4 H1 H2 H3 150
1.2
pF

100
%

1.0

0.8 50

0.6 0
H1 H2 H3
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 Measured values Nameplate values
Hz

Figure 4: C1 Power Factor Results for Three Westinghouse Type-S 37kV Bushings

THE VALUE OF PERFORMING POWER FACTOR SWEEP MEASUREMENTS ON BUSHINGS NETAWORLD • 7

PF fequency sweep
 0.36 H1 H2
0.34
0.32

INDUSTRY TOPICS
% 0.30
0.28
0.26
0.24 than their respective nameplate values. Notice power factor measurements are invalid. In
0.22 that the power factor measurement for the this case, the customer determined that the
H2 bushing is clearly voltage sensitive. primary-side bushing terminals were not short-
0 50 100 150 200
Furthermore, the 250
power 300
factor350 400
frequency circuited together when the C1 power factor
Hz
sweep traces for the three bushings are erratic measurements were performed; this identified
and jagged. In general, jagged power factor the cause of the abnormal power factor
frequency sweep traces are indicative of invalid measurements.
power factor measurements. Regardless of
whether an insulation system is healthy or
compromised, its power
PF fequency sweepfactor frequency sweep CONCLUSI ON
Cap. at 60.00 Hz
trace should be smooth. With both the voltage and frequency sweep
1.6 200
measurements on hand, invalid measurements
1.4 H1By analyzing
H2 H3only the 10kV power factor are easier to identify. The equipment operator
150
measurements, it is not obvious that the power can use the sweep measurements to quickly
1.2
factor measurements for the three bushings are identify
100 and correct invalid measurements in

pF
invalid; however, the voltage and frequency the field before the transformer is placed back
%

1.0

0.8
sweep test results make it obvious that the into service.
50 The engineer can use the sweep
measurements to identify invalid power factor
0.6 0
measurements, especially when they must rely
LAPP POC 138kV BUSHINGS H1 H2 H3
on the data provided within a test report.
02kV Power
50 10010kV150
Power 200 10kV
250 PF – 300 350 400
Nameplate Measured values Nameplate values
Factor Factor Hz 2kV PF Power Factor
Finally, power factor sweep measurements help
H1 0.34% 0.36% 0.02% 0.29% to accurately assess the condition of a bushing’s
H2 0.52% 0.24% -0.28% 0.23% insulation system. This helps the engineer
H3 0.34% 0.35% 0.01% 0.23% choose the best course of action.

PF fequency sweep
REFERENCES
0.38
IEEE Std. C57.152-2013, IEEE Guide for
0.36
Diagnostic Field Testing of Fluid-Filled Power
0.34 H1 H2 H3
0.32
Transformers, Regulators, and Reactors.
0.30
%

0.28
0.26 Brandon Dupuis joined OMICRON
0.24 in 2013 and presently holds the position
0.22 of Regional Application Specialist for
transformer testing. Brandon’s focus is
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 currently on standard and advanced
Hz electrical diagnostics for power transformers
and circuit breakers.He is a well-known
Figure 5: C1 Power Factor Results for Three Lapp POC 138kV OMICRON instructor teaching electrical transformer
diagnostic testing theory, application, and test result analysis.
Bushings
Brandon received a BSEE from the University of Maine.

8 • SPRING 2019 THE VALUE OF PERFORMING POWER FACTOR SWEEP MEASUREMENTS ON BUSHINGS