Partial Discharge Estimation Based on Radiometric and Classical Measurements

E. C. T. de Macedo, J. M. R. de Souza Neto, Juan Moises Mauricio Villanueva, Edson C. Guedes and R. C. S. Freire Department of Electrical Engineering Federal University of Campina Grande - PB, Brazil {euler.macedo, jose.neto, jmauricio}@ee.ufcg.edu.br. {edson,freire}@dee.ufcg.edu.br
Abstract Partial Discharge (PD) is characterized by high frequency current pulses that occur in the interior of high voltage (HV) apparatus. It involves gas ionization processes within insulators and can therefore indicate insulation defects. Low levels of PD are not necessarily of urgent concern in the context of safe operation of plant but they may gradually increase with the time, until complete discharge (flashover) occurs causing catastrophic plant failure. PD levels and their occurrence are therefore monitored (usually periodically) during the operational lifetime of HV equipment. This paper compares PD measurements made using three different techniques: the classical method described in IEC 60270 [1], the high frequency current transformer (HFCT) method and a free-space radiometric (FSR) method. The comparison is made with a view assessing the practicality of replacing the classical quantitative method with other more convenient/cheaper methods. Keywords - Partial Discharge, IEC 60270, HFCT, radiometer.

Ian A Glover Department of Electronic & Electrical Engineering University of Strathclyde, Scotland, UK and CAPES Visiting Professor, Federal University of Campina Grande - PB, Brazil ian.glover@eee.strath.ac.uk installation. More recently, driven partly by an increase in sensitivity of PD sensors and a decrease in the costs of sensors, associated instrumentation and digital signal processing, automated PD measurements have been used to diagnose systems insulation faults in real time. The electrical, acoustic, optical and chemical effects of PD have all been used to detect its occurrence. Popular techniques for PD detection include the electrical configurations presented in the IEC 60270 standard [1], acoustic emission-based methods [2], ultra-high frequency (UHF) measurements [3], high frequency current transformers (HFCT) sensors [4], and radiometric systems [5]. The measurement techniques presented in IEC 60270 are often used to evaluate PD in controlled areas, such as laboratories. Acoustic measurements rely on the detection of the acoustic wave that is launched into the insulation each time a PD pulse occurs. The use of HFCTs in frequency bands within the range 10 kHz to 1.75 GHz have been widely used in field measurements. UHF (300 MHz to 3 GHz) PD detection has been applied to the monitoring of insulation integrity within transformers. (In this particular application the UHF antenna is located inside the transformer tank, often by inserting it via the oil drain.) UHF systems have also been deployed as free-space radiometers (FSRs), i.e. systems with antennas external to all plant, which receive energy radiated both directly from the PD source and from conductors leading away from the source. FSR systems are especially vulnerable to discrete spectral interference (DSI) arising from radiotransmissions. The purpose of this paper is to present a comparison of PD measurements using three different (electrical) techniques, i.e. the classical method presented in the IEC 60270 standard, the HFCT method and the FSR method. II. MEASUREMENT METHODS

I.

INTRODUCTION

The IEC 60270 standard [1] defines partial discharge (PD) as a localized electrical discharge that only partially bridges the insulation between conductors and which can or cannot occur adjacent to a conductor. The strength, or intensity, of a PD pulse is quantified by the concept of apparent charge (usually expressed in pC). Apparent charge is defined in the same standard as that charge which, if injected within a very short time between the terminals of the test object in a specified test circuit, would give the same reading on the measuring instrument as the PD current pulse itself. PD generates heat and oxidizing agents (e.g. ozone) and is therefore potentially harmful to insulation. Once established, due to insulation imperfection(s), it may further degrade the quality and performance of the insulation rapidly. It thus decreases insulation lifetime and may eventually result in catastrophic failure [6]. PD current, which flows in a series of short pulses, is thus symptomatic of damaged insulation in high voltage (HV) apparatus [2] and its monitoring is thus a useful method of assessing the degree to which insulation has been compromised by aging, manufacturing defects, chemical attack or mechanical deformation. PD measurements have been used for many years to evaluate the insulation condition of in-service HV equipment and to guarantee the quality of new equipment prior to

A. Classical PD Measurement The classical detection of PD is described in [1]. The basic standard model is illustrated schematically in Fig. 1.

Figure 1 - Classical PD measurement [1]. t

where U~ is a high-voltage power supply, Zmi is the input impedance of the measuring system, CC is the connecting cable, Ca is the device under test (DUT), Ck is a coupling MI capacitor, CD is the coupling device and M is the measuring instrument. The coupling capacitor allows only the flow of short PD current pulses thereby increasing the measurement sensitivity. The measurement impedance converts the PD current pulses to a proportional voltage for convenient e amplification, visualization (using, for example a high acquisition-rate oscilloscope), and storage. The measurement LC impedance can be implemented as an RL or RC circuit, acting as a filter to reduce noise [7]. at The classical method is currently tha which is most commonly used to measure PD in generat tors, transformers, cables and capacitors. The use of a narrow-b band measurement impedance can cause errors, however, due t distortion (time to dispersion) of PD pulses if this is sufficien great to cause ntly significant overlapping of pulses. B. HFCT PD Measurement The measurement of PD using an HFC is illustrated in CT Fig. 2. The HFCT is usually connected in se eries with the DUT ground connection since in this configuration the danger to personnel is minimized. ted The HCFT employed in the work report here has a rise time < 175 ps and a high frequency (-3dB) cutoff of 2 GHz. ) The HFCT output is a current flowing in a 50 load. The core 0 is a composite of cross-field annealed CoFe amorphous alloy e and nanocrystalline alloy to optimize the fr requency response and minimize ringing.

he pulse-like nature of PD and th short duration of these pulses results in radio frequency (RF) components which are readily ) radiated either from the dis scharge site directly or from conductors leading away from the site. This makes possible m the wireless detection of PD at a distance using an appropriate, broadband radio receiver [5]. The wireless detection of PD using a FSR (i.e. radio receiver designed to measure RF noise power) is illustrated schematically in Fig. 3. It has the obvious advantage that nophysical connection need be made to HV (or any other) equipment. Primary insulation remains un-bridged and the n installation/reconfiguration of detection equipment does not require any item of HV plant to be taken out of service. The disadvantages, compared to th classical and HFCT methods he is that (i) the radio channel m distort the PD signal to the may extent that the simple pulsed structure of the signal may be lost, and (ii) an absolute ca alibration of PD intensity, i.e. apparent charge, is probably n possible. This is because the not radiation pattern of the PD source is not usually known in practice (and so the fraction of PD energy being received cannot be established). FSR methods may therefore be R restricted in practice to the pro ovision of relative PD intensity data.

Antenna

50 cable

Figure 3 Free-space rad diometric PD measurement.

In Fig. 3 the antenna is con nnected directly to the measuring instrument (oscilloscope). Sen nsitivity could be improved by incorporating a low-noise amp plifier between the antenna and the cable. III.
ENTS METHODOLOGY MEASUREME

A. Classical Methodolgy Classical measurements have been made using the LDS-6 commercial PD monitorin ng and diagnosis system, manufactured by the Doble Lem Group. The DUT used in mke the measurements is a PD gen nerator cell developed, in-house, to allow PD to be generated reproducibly. The PD cell is d constructed from an acryli cylinder containing plane ic electrodes that generate PD within a sample of insulation located between them. The electrodes and insulation are immersed in transformer oil. For the measurements reported d here the PD cell was energized using a 15 kV power supply. A schematic diagram of the ce is shown in Fig. 4 and a ell photograph is shown in Fig. 5. The LDS-6 PD detector is designed to facilitate the t methodology specified in [1]. It provides two separate channels for hardware gating. The sup ppression of external noise is achieved using a separate (gatin sensor) antenna. Fig. 6 shows ng the internal architecture of the LDS-6. Additional information can be found in [8].

Figure 2 HFCT PD measuremen nt.

C. FSR PD Measurement The two former measurement methods require physical s contact with the equipment being monitored and each item of d plant therefore requires (at least) one dedicated sensor. The

Lemke, and designed to match PD signals above 30 MHz to a 50 resistive load. B. HFCT Methodology HFCT measurements have been made using the FCT-05520:1-WB sensor from Bergoz Instrumentation. The measurement set-up is shown in Fig. 7. The HFCT measurements were taken concurrently with the classical measurements.

Figure 4 Schetic diagram of PD cell (dimensions in mm).

DUT

HFCT

Figure 7 HFCT measurements.

C. FSR Methodology FSR measurements were made using a disk-cone antenna and a 5 GSa/s TDS 5104B Tektronix oscilloscope. The set-up is shown in Fig. 8.
Figure 5 - PD cell. Disk-cone antenna Ck

HFCT

LDM-5

Figure 8 - Measurement setup using the disk-cone antenna. Figure 6 - LDS-6 internal archicteture [8].

Some devices (e.g. variable frequency drives, power tools etc.) create short electromagnetic impulses in the form of commutator noise. The spectrum of these pulses is similar to the PD pulse spectrum so they cannot, simply, be filtered out. They can be distinguished by an antenna, however, located such that only the noise pulses (not the PD pulses) are received. The gating unit suppresses the measurement at the times that the noise pulses occur. Because the noise and the PD signals are statistically independent, PD measurements can still be properly analyzed even though co-occurring PD events will be suppressed with the noise [7]. The measurement impedance used in the laboratory measurements was the LDM-5, also produced by Doble

The antenna was positioned 1 m from the DUT (the PD cell). The disk-cone antenna [9] is a monopole variation of the biconical antenna. It is low-gain, omnidirectional, linearlypolarised and has wide bandwidth. It is also an unbalanced structure and therefore does not require a balun for a coaxial feed. The antenna geometry is related to the lowest (cut-off) frequency, fc, of its design band [5]. The antenna used was designed for a cut-off frequency of 200 MHz and an input impedance of 50 [9]. The FSR measurements were made concurrently with the classical and HFCT measurements. Fig. 9 shows a schematic diagram of the antenna.

CH1

CH2

CH3
View into bottom of cone Side View

Figure 9 - Disk-cone antenna.

IV.

PRELIMINARY RESULT TS
Figure 12 Comparison of classical ( (CH 1), HFCT (CH 2) and FSR (CH 3) time series.

The PD measurements were compared using the 5 GSa/s oscilloscope. The LDS-6 output was connect to channel 1 of ted the oscilloscope, the HFCT was connected to channel 2, and depicted in Fig. 10. the antenna was connected to channel 3, as d The channel sensitivity settings were 2 V/di 10 mV/div and iv, 50 mV/div respectively. t Fig. 11 shows the estimated apparent charge from the classical measurement. The PD intensity level can vary with time. The maximum value obtained during the measurement was approximately 600 pC (Q IEC). At the time of the particular measurement shown in Fig. 11 the peak of apparent e charge was 400 pC.

CH1

CH2

CH3

H Figure 13- Comparison of classical (CH 1), HFCT (CH 2) and FSR (CH 3) on expanded time scale.
LDS-6
LDM-5

CH2

Rad diometer
CH1 CH3

The CH1 data represents int tegrated current (the integration originated from the measurem ment impedance of the LDS-6) whereas the CH2 and CH3 da are related to the PD current ata derivative. The calculated freq quency spectra of the HFCT and FSR signals are shown in Fig. 14.

Figure 10 Laboratory measument sch heme.

Figure 14 Comparison of FFC and FSR PD pulse spectra. CT

Figure 11 - Apparent charge as estimated by the LDIC. y

Figure 12 compares an example time-series for the three measurement methods and Figure 13 shows the same data on s an expanded time-scale.

The frequency of the spectr rum peaks are very similar; 41 MHz and 44 MHz for the H HFCT and FSR measurements respectively. This is good evidence that the two measurements he retain spectral information of th underlying PD process. Fig. 15 shows the compar rison between the normalized HFCT and FSR pulse signals m measurements.

[9]

Moore P J, Portugues I E and Glover I A: Partial discharge investigation of a power transformer using wireless wideband radio frequency measurements, Power Engineering Letters, IEEE Trans. on Power Delivery, vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 528 530, January 2006.

Figure 15-Comparison of concurrenlty recorded HFCT and FSR signals.

The calculated correlation coefficient between the two signals is 0.19. The weakness of this correlation may be due, in part, to distortion of the FSR signal caused by multipath propagation. V. CONCLUSIONS

Three methodologies for monitoring PD have been compared. All three methods are clearly responding to the same PD events and in this sense there is the possibility of selecting the most convenient method for any particular application. Since HFCT methods sample a definable fraction of total PD energy this is calibratable in terms of apparent charge. It seems likely that FSR measurements will be difficult if not impossible to calibrate in this way. Nevertheless, the qualitative agreement between HFCT and FSR measurements suggest that FSR approaches may have significant utility in applications where absolute calibration is not essential. ACKNOWLEDGMENT The authors wish to thank the National Council for Scientific and Technological Development - CNPQ, and the Coordination for the Improvement of Higher Level Personnel CAPES and INCT NAMITEC for their support in the institutional research.

REFERENCES
[1] [2] [3] IEC 60270 (2000) High-voltage test techniques, Partial Discharge Measurements, Rel. Tc., Geneve, Switzerland. CIGRE WG 21-05 Partial discharge detection by means of acoustic detection, 1993 M.D. Judd , G.P. Cleary, ci Bennoch, Applying UHF Partial Discharge Detection to Power Transformers IEEE Power Engineering Review, pp57-58, August, 2002 M. Michel, Innovative asset management and targeted investments using on-line partial discharge monitoring & mapping techniques, 19th int. Conference Moore P J, Portugues I and Glover I A: Radiometric location of partial discharge sources on energised high-voltage plant, IEEE Trans. in Power Delivery, vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 2264-2272, July 2005. Nattrass, D. A. Partial Discharge Measurement and Interpretation, IEEE Electrical, 1988. Ma. X.; Zhou, C. e Kemp, I., Automated Wavelet Selection and Thresholding for PD Detection, IEEE Electrical Insulation Magazine, 18(2):37 44, 2002. D.Russwurm, Partial Discharge Measurements and Diagnostics on Power Transformers using a Multi Channel Digital PD Detector, HV Testing, Monitoring and Diagnostic Workshop, Alexandria, Virginia, September 2000.

[4]

[5]

[6] [7]

[8]