You are on page 1of 6

Fault diagnosis of power transformers: application of fuzzy set theory, expert systems and artificial neural networks

w.x u
D.Wang Z.Zhou H.Chen

Indexing terms: Artificial neural network, Fuzzy set, Expert system, Fault diagnosis, Transformer

Abstract: The application of fuzzy set theory, expert systems and artificial neural networks to fault diagnosis of power transformers is introduced, and uncertain reasoning and the combination between ES and ANN are studied. Uncertain reasoning is the main diagnostic method. The ES/ANN combination, called the consultative mechanism, can help to improve the correctness of the diagnosis and ensure the accuracy of the knowledge base. Experimental results are given which verify the proposed method.

tion into quantitative data [6, 71. In this way, the problems of ES knowledge acquisition and ANN inputoutput data have been settled.

1

Introduction

The power transformer is the major electrical component in a power system, and its correct functioning is vital to system operation. Methods for the diagnosis of potential faults concealed inside power transformers have attracted much research interest. Dissolved-gas analysis (DGA), which the IEEE and IEC have always proposed, is an effective way of identifying incipient or potential faults in power transformers [l, 21. Based on the interpretation of DGA, there are some successful precedents for applying ES to fault diagnosis [3]. With the development of artificial intelligence (AI), expert systems (ES) and artificial neural networks (ANN) will be more and more widely used, and open up broad prospects for fault diagnosis [4]; but there are many problems present in diagnostic systems based on

1.2 Expert system The fault diagnosis ES of transformers is a knowledgebased system. Obviously, there are two notable characteristics in it: (i) the knowledge stems from expert experience (ii) the knowledge needs to be translated into the respective rules which are collected in the knowledge base. However, there are two limitations in the process of ES development, which are listed below: (i) the difficulty of knowledge acquisition. Because of the insufficiency of expert knowledge, and the difficulty of rule translation, the ES knowledge base is usually imperfect. The imperfection shows that the diagnostic system no longer has any effect when none of the rules correspond to the fault phenomena (ii) the problem of uncertain inference. By reason of the complexity of fault diagnosis, ensuring the correctness of inference results is a rather difficult problem.

AI.

I. 1 Uncertain factors It is very difficult to exactly describe the relationship between the phenomena and the reasons for the power transformer faults. This means that the faults often show fuzziness. As suggested by Zadeh [5], fuzzy set theory can be utilised to deal with the uncertainties. In fuzzy set theory, the membership grade function is proposed to translate uncertain or qualitative informa0IEE, 1997 IEE Proceedings online no. 19970856 Paper first received 6th March and in revised form 12th August 1996 The authors are with the Department of Electrical Engineering, Southeastern University, Nanjing 210096, People’s Republic of China
IEE Proc.-Sei. Meas. Technol., Vol. 144, No. 1. January 1997

I. 3 Artificial neural network The mechanism of fault diagnosis using the ANN approach is different from that of ES. ANN knowledge is discreetly distributed all over the network, based on the sample learning, and not stored in a knowledge base like ES. Obviously, ANN has a great capacity for obtaining knowledge; nevertheless, it has many problems. While the difference between the training samples and the fault samples is very great, the ANN reasoning conclusion is questionable. From this analysis, ES and ANN both have some weaknesses. The best way to overcome the shortcomings is by connecting ES and ANN as a whole. The connection can be called ‘the consultative mechanism’. In this way, ES and ANN can complement each other to increase the perfection of the knowledge base and the reliability of fault diagnosis.
2
Application of fuzzy set theory

The acquisition of ES knowledge is the key to the development of an expert system, and the acquisition of uncertain knowledge is very important.
39

1] E 40 The fault diagnosis ES consists of four parts. very true (vt). No. 0. Then it provides a sound basis for the application of ES and ANN. 2.x = 1 1.2)2.5. (ii) Knowledge base Each ES needs an effective knowledge base to save the expert knowledge.2 Max-min operations: Let A and B be two fuzzy sets with membership functions uA(x) and uB(x). = 0. (ii) Some expert experience and some criteria which are expressed in linguistic language cannot be numerated directly. Technol. except for the constant function. 11.) = 2 . when U = 0.275). This process is called numerical uncertainty translation. 1 u. to build and control the database. 1 Membership gvadefwzction of fuzzy languages X (2) (3) uD(x) = max(uA(z).1. Conversely.ug(x)). the relationship between ‘true’ and ‘false’ and its degree. 1 1 uut(2)= x 2 . In the acquisition of uncertain knowledge.5. 2 E [O. X E [O.t(x) = 21/2. 1) As shown in Fig. 1.c (. 2. a membership grade which belongs to a specified range is used to decide the value which represents the element within the set. some typical fuzzy languages are shown as follows: completely false (cf). rt = (0. The membership grade functions may be regarded as exponential functions. the designer can also propose the common membership grade function on the basis of fuzzy set theory. vt = (0. true (t). completely true (ct).“ ) 1 / 2 . When U < 0. the uncertain and the qualitative information can be converted into fuzzy quantitative data. it falls in the positive region.’ Let X be a universal set and x be elements of the universal set. false (f). which are obtained through uncertain knowledge acquisition based on numerical uncertainty translation and linguistic uncertainty translation. January 1997 . I] ut(. the fuzzy language belongs to the negative range. 5 .uA(x))Ix E (1) where uA is the membership function. As shown in Fig. 2. I.xE ) Fig. 0. 1). ct = 1. respectively. unknown (uk).z. ~ [0. I Fuzzy set. rather true (rt). The IEE Prm-Sei.3851.275. 1 1 1 ~.In the process of designing a transformer fault diagnostic system. uk = 0. C language.5. vf= (0. finally. z E [O.x = 0 )f . 144. On the premise that the function is not given by the ES. 0. 0. Two points should be noted. They also need to be changed into fuzzy numbers. the uncertainly shows the following two characteristics: (i) A great number of test data (including the preventive test and other tests). a fuzzy set A is an ordered pair: A = {(x. when U > 0. t = [0.5. t 2.5. knowledge acquisition database knowledge base hg. and obviously falls within [0. The method of numerical uncertainty translation is the establishment of many suitable membership grade functions.615).725. 1 1 Uf(2)= 1 .u B ( x ) ) . The process is called linguistic uncertainty translation. f = r0. r f = (0. x} 2.3 Linguistic uncertainty translation It is impossible for experts to strictly give the membership grade function to describe their experience and the criteria.1 Introduction of fuzzy set theory Elements in the ordinary set can be assigned to 1.615. very false (vf).k(z) = 0 . which reflects the fuzziness.x E [O. Through the methods mentioned above. and the remains of the universe are 0.2 Structure offault diagnosis ES 3 Fault diagnosis ES [91 { { u v f ( x ) = (1 . The membership functions of C = A A B and D = A v B are defined by U C ( ~ = min(uA(x). the simple and valid value region can be calculated: c j = 0. 0. the following introduces each part in detail: (i) Database The function of the database is to realise the storage and management of a lot of test data. it becomes the fuzzy point. this denotes a strengthening of the manner of expression. Each of the fuzzy languages has a respective membership grade function which is used to describe the fuzziness. Then. z E [O. Meas. (iii) Reasoning engine The system adopts forward reasoning to control the inference process. 81. this means a weakening of the mode of expression.z E [O.385. The knowledge base mentioned in the paper is made up of many rules. 1 1 urp(z)= (1. if exponent A < 1. some expert experience and some criteria which can be directly numerated should be translated into fuzzy numbers. According to fuzzy set theory [5. If exponent A > 1. These functions are as follows: l. needs to be expressed clearly.1] uct(Z) = 0 . The ES adopts an ORACLE relational database system. Vol. E 2 x 2. and a combination of both. x E [O. rather false (rf).2 Numerical uncertainty translation The aim of numerical uncertainty translation is to satisfy the demand for the knowledge acquisition of ES and the numerated input-output of ANN.J: E (0..7251. I .5). In daily life.

615) AE[0. CE[0. Techno!. Table 1: Standard Characteristicgas method No. H .5). Fault nature 1 2 ordinary overheating fault serious overheating fault partial discharge fault Sparking discharge fault arcing discharge fault Feature of characteristic gas A€(0. B'.Table 1 can be translated into a fuzzy expression as shown in Table 2. CE(0. I . B=I. DE[0. CE(0. H is rather high .Hz/(C1+C2) and CHJ(CI+C2) Because Table 1 reflects heuristic knowledge.. CH.11.H2. the second is not to inquire of the identical premise more than once. C1+C2 = 107.H. 1 0. CH.0. D.9. D. January 1997 .5. D' and E' of Table 2 with the standard values A.5. II: E 2 E [loo. E'.5.-methane.3 x=CI+C2. BE[0. C.615. ..5 and CF = U is the possibility.5. indicate the ratio in CI+C2 which C.5 denotes 'UP.-Sei. C2H2/(C1 +C2) and CH4/(C1+C2).0.0. x is the lower limit of A. BE(0.3. the membership grade U' = xn/xr where x' is A'. E and X" is the upper limit of A. 144. C2H2s 5 ppm. C.5. CI+C2 is high.615). cover. CH > 5ppm . w m Fig. C. B and C represent the converted membership grade function of CI+C2.615). the membership grade U' = x'/x (c) when they are not completely matched and the converted value is greater than the upper limit of the standard value. Based on eqns.11 partial discharge fault 3 4 5 Sparking discharge fault arcing discharge fault C1+C2(CH. (iv) User interface The user interface helps us to exchange information between the operator and the machine. C2H2-acetylene.0. counts main composition of CI+C2 CI+C2 is not high.5.4 Membership grade function o C2H2 f 10 According to the method introduced above.. EE[0.5.615. the membership grade functions shown in Figs.2.. .WHEN CF > w.0. ppm Membershipfunction o C1+C2 and H. E. The respective membership grade is calculated as follows: (a) when the converted value and the standard value are completely matched. the converted value A'.615. and are calculated by C. (iii) the reasoning form IF.H. H. 100) x 2 150 (4) (5) 100 150 The following shows the uncertain reasoning steps using the characteristic gas method: (i) translating the actual test data of the dissolved gasin-oil into a fuzzy number.2) A€[0. B'. kene. H2 s 100 ppm Based on these.. and H respectively.11.-ethylene.+C. . H2 = 33. CZH2 > 10ppm. 3 and 4 can be determined by fuzzy set theory. According to the stipulation for many kinds of criteria and expert experience. ' "'~ " It 1 . D and E. C ..0. D' and E' can be obtained which are subject to [O. x=C2H2.5) AE[0. Table 2: Fuzzy expression of characteristic gas method No. of which w is the threshold value = 0. . can carry on the uncertain inference. C'. The program of the user interface is compiled in C. (ii) respectively comparing the converted values A'. 10ppm. The inference form is the uncertain reasoning. 4 and 5. Meas. DE[0.-hydrogen A.01 * II: . it should be changed to the fuzzy expression which can form the ES rules. H2 is rather high CI+C2 is not high.11 and E > D AE[0. when 0. C€(0.1] and D > E.+C. respectively. B.615.11.. D'. D and E...005 * x. C2H2is high and occupies main composition of CI+C2.H.11. the acceptable limits of some dissolved gas are [lo] Cl+C2 5 100 ppm. 150) [o. BE[0.. Table 1 shows the meaning of the characteristic gas method. I]. the general membership grade U = uI' A u2' . C'. Example I : The test data of the dissolved gas-in-oil (ppm): CH4 = 36. .0. the membership grade U' = 1 (b) when they are not completely matched and the converted value is less than the lower limit of the standard value. B. Finally. C. C2H2= 41 Fig.2.THEN . but it does not count main composition of CI+C2. -. B'. C'.H2 and CH. No. It has the advantages of flexibility and directness.first one is not to consider the result corresponding to the negative premise. B. is hinh. H. Fault nature ordinary overheating fault serious overheating fault Feature of characteristic gas CI+C2 is rather high: C2H2c 5PPm CI+C2 is high. Vol. u={ 0.+C2H2)-al C.11. We take the standard characteristic gas method as an example to illustrate the uncertain reasoning process of ES. f IEE Proc.0.5).H. H > .-ethane.

extract essential characteristics from input data.425 0. 9 qjl.575.q (14) ANN can learn and adapt to statistical distributions. using the uncertain inference. 1 = 1. if none of the membership grades is greater than w = 0. the knowledge is distributed over the structure of ANN.21 0. 5.5. and the connected weight .3404 0. a ..5.I * %1 * h.3319 = 0 for the arcing discharge fault: U = 0.3 0 1 0 0. January 1997 . x2(B'). p = 13 and n l = 12. x .. Above all..87 A 0.288 /\OXO.16595.0224 0.3402.7 0 0 0 Yz Y3 Y4 Y5 0. 2 . .3 0 0.285 0. At the same time. E' is the function of wq. the output layer.4444 0.1053 0. is made up of m output units including m threshold value al.935 A 0 A 0.2673 0. Since fault diagnosis is basically a process of associating an input data pattern to one or more fault conditions.1021 0. nl) and n l middle units including the nl threshold value el. j = 1..0. . the connected weights and the threshold value can be determined..5..x3(Cr). According to eqn. For the characteristic gas method.0086 0.8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. the inference is failure.435 1 0. a partial discharge fault.0479 0.7903 0.4 0.6093 0. the second layer is the hidden layer. the third layer. 8.935 A 0 A 0.5 From the analyses. Table 3: 13 set training samples Xl x z x 3 x4 x5 Yl 0.87 A 0 A 0.58 0 0. In this way. D' = 0.. 4 wheref(ui) = 1/(1 + e-... secondly. . including II input units xl. if there is more than one membership grade greater than w = 0. the diagnosis conclusions are obtained by uncertain reasoning. and require no physical models. first. .x4(D') and x5(E') respectively represent the numerated input data. Finally. the iteration calculation will stop until E < E by learning of the training samples. the first layer is an input layer . we have: A' = 0...0183 0 0.8 0.7 0.5568 0... After translation. After the structure is decided. No 1. y3. Table 3 shows 13 sets of numerical data of the training samples..9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0. Fault diagnosis ANN r:? = P <. Vol 144. it means that the rules are not corresponding to the test data.. then diagnosis can be reached for newly occurring faults. a serious overheating fault. which contains the connected weight between the first and the second layer wii (i = 1. 2.0042 0 1 1 1 0.5 Structure of BP netwovk The following equations are given: 0.6615 0.3319 A 1 = 0 for the partial discharge fault: U = 0.05 0..8 0.3 and C2H2= 0.5 0 0 0 0 IEE Proc -Sei Meas Technol..9. nl.5 0. THEN the ordinary overheating fault has happened WHEN U > 0.]).. Fig. B' = 0. m). we have the following iteration formulas: (9) P P P where q is the iteration step..9 0. C' = 0.1 0.5125 0.9 1 0 0. Then. for fault diagnosis ES.082 1 1 1 1 0 0 0. ANN is an ideal tool for such a task. E' = 0. .0856 0. x2. .and y t (i = j = 1.3319 for the sparking discharge fault: U = 0. yl. 02.. x.8 0 0. * (1 . y2.. and E' is the overall error.5728 0.3 0..4766 0.2 0.d 2 i= 1 where tl denotes the standard output value calculated by training samples n p i=l where p represents p training samples.5 0.. a sparking discharge fault and an arcing discharge fault. (7) n E = C(tl.075 1 XI x2 .0488 0. and al. Table 2 should be changed into the rules stored in the ES knowledge base. y4 and y5 respectively denote an ordinary overheating fault. for the ordinary overheating fault: U = 1 A 1 = I for the serious overheating fault: U = 0.53 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0.295 0. and the knowledge base is imperfect. ( A ' ) .075 0.. 2. On. After calculation by the method mentioned above. Then. As shown in Fig.8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 i=l 42 0. x.3319 A 1 = 0. The inference conclusion is: IF the test value of the dissolved gas is (ppm): CH4 = 36..7 1 0 0.0777 0. 2. Wnl x.. let n = m = 5. Cl+C2 = 107.09 1 0. We use a 3-layer BP (backpropagation) network to diagnose faults through p (p > 1) training samples learning. conversely. a qjl (j = 1. 5) are obtained by the fuzzy set theory mentioned above.7 0. Supposing E > 0..4176 0. H2 = 33. it means that the forms of fault are many and varied. the user interface is utilised to receive test data which are collected in the database.. n.. 2.2407 0.

-0.4486 -0. ANN and the combination between ES and 43 .6128 -1.0058 2. 0.8. ES..9791 0.02801 can be obtained from the numerated input data. 0.. Example 3: Another set of test data of the dissolved gas-in-oil (ppm) are: CH. = 201. In the latter case..8108 -1.6670 -1.0087 1. (iii) When the difference is large. Through eqns. If they are similar. . Meus.8.2232 -1.9241 -0.6834 1.9468.9811 0.8314 2. y 2 > 0.4991 -3. 0.4869 0.5 and the reasoning conclusion is the serious overheating fault. After using these methods we can correct the ANN structure. 0.2673 2.8871 2.2697 2. 1.1058 -0.7308 Fig.0006...9836 0.2297 -0. 144.6915 0.4181 0. This verifies our reasoning. (b) If the ES inference is failure.0263 0..6716 1. No.3944 . 1.1071 -5.9114 0.1114 -0.7594 1.7258 -3.7685 iEsik-l I I Y l A N N difference Large 1.1326 2.4557 -3. 01 is gained.. if they are inconsistent. 0.5480 -2. 5 Consultative mechanism between ES and ANN From above introduction. The real fault occurring is the overheating fault for temperatures > 700°C. C2Hz = 5.8196 - start v 1.. The distances dl and d2 can reflect the difference: d l = .6222 0.5556 0.9207 1. Vol.3204 -2.8292 2.1353 -2.1892 -0.0182 1. C2H2 = 16. the ANN stucture is corrected.. the first step is comparing the difference between the training samples of ANN and the test input.. Fig.1694 2. 0.6 Consultative mechanism between ES and ANN = 1.- 0.1526 1 I I I I 1.5804 1.4819 1.9196 -4. [w] = - 1..5. -0. -1..9151 1. ANN obtains knowledge continuously and can diagnose almost all kinds of transformer faults step by step. Cl+C2 = 20. ES needs to be started. To solve the problem.4678 -0. it means that the ANN reasoning is wrong.4329 7.8643 1.0725 0.3866 2.6439 1.0008.8485 1. When w = 0..5555 0.7549.0566 - ANN the drawback is that there is a great difference between the input data and training samples. 6.3389 -0.9166 -1.9420 1. There are two points which need attention: (a) If the inference is success.3703 -2. -0. if dl > or d2 > e2. the reasoning also fails..7989 3. it means that the ANN reasoning conclusion is right.2350 Example 2: The new test data of the dissolved gas-inoil (ppm) are: CH.0880 -3. let us compare the ES reasoning conclusion with ANN results.... Example 4: In example 3. After the input is numerated.2069 5. 0.1614 .1848 [&I 2.4645 0. and for IEE Proc-Sei.9951 3.8.3570 -4. ES has the disadvantage of an imperfect knowledge base. In this way.9452 -1.lcil 1.65. H2 = 5.6733 1.4812 0. C1+C2 = 3708. Through knowledge acquisition from experts. means that the difference is not great and the correct conclusion can be obtained.8.1675 1. it means that the difference is large and the reasoning conclusion is questionable.45241 is obtained.0968 -2.6779 0.6787 .8345 . However..6715 2. . each of them has some weakness.4861.2877 2.8288 0.8.0531 0.0759 3.3474 -0. January 1997 (ii) Let el > 0 and c2 > 0.3999 2. obtaining some suitable rules. conversely.0056 -0.7304 -0. The conclusion may be the overheating fault (ordinary or serious). The reasoning result is wrong because the difference between the input samples and the training samples is very large.2106 0.5537 -1.1716 -2. Technol.9880 -3.9863 ..3127. but using ES. the output matrix Y = [0. but the real fault occurring is the partial discharge of high energy density.. the paper proposes a consultative mechanism between ES and ANN to combine them as a whole.0471 1.2264 0.4169 1. 6 Conclusions The paper introduces the application of fuzzy set theory.0850 5.9550 0..4340 1.5920 0..3634 2.0528 2.6278 1.0088. 0.9144 0. From now on. ANN can diagnose the kind of fault similar to example 3. causing the error in the diagnosis. 0. Taking Y and the converted test data as a new set training sample.9633 -1. the correct conclusion cannot be obtained by ANN. 0. 6 shows the structure of consultative mechanism between ES and ANN. it means that the knowledge base is short of the corresponding rules. the ANN structure should be modified by adding the new training samples on the basis of the ES reasoning conclusion.4178 where xi is a set of training samples and x is a set of test numerated data. In detail: (i) When ANN is started. Y = [0.9448 -2.i)2 ( d2 = 111: .6811 -3. 0.2817 .5019 -4.5373 -3.6872 0.5886 -3.1956 .7023 -1.7005 -1. H2 = 76.8207 -2.8189. 0. when dl < el and d2 < E ~ it . The only way to settle the problem is by way of new knowledge acquisition.4671 . 1. 6 and 7 . the output Y = [0.6255 1. ES and ANN have effective application in the fields of transformer fault diagnosis. . = 5.

Korea.): ‘Electrical insulating oils. (Ed. pp. ES is used to obtain new knowledge and make up for the deficiency of ANN. 316. 8. H. In this mechanism.: ‘Transformer fault diagnosis by dissolved-gas analysis’. 199221 NEGOITA. J.E. 1st edn. this mechanism has problems of contradictory inference and knowledge ’explosion’ of the knowledge base. (6)..A. 1983.: ‘Criteria for the interpretation of data for dissolved gases in oil from transformers (a review)’ in ERDMAN. and ES takes an additional role. A 4 5 6 7 8 9 110 10 GRIFFIN. ANN plays the leading role. pp.: ‘An expert system for transformer fault diagnosis using dissolved gas analysis’. T. C.1. 1988). Obviously. Ind. on the other hand. J. Menlo Park. 89-106 44 IEE Proc. P.J. 1. July 1995.Proceedings of ICEE’95. pp. On the one hand. For the consultative mechanism. L. 111-182 2 IEC Publication 599: ‘Intermetation of the analysis of gases in 3 transformers and other oil-%lled electrical equipment inservice’. In$ Control. Fuzzy Sets Syst.. After examination by 45 sets of test data. 1985) ZIMMERMAN ’H. From the analyses in the paper. 1993.Vol. In this way.. IEEE Trans. LING.J.L.: ‘Expert system and fuzzy systems’ (Cliff Beniamid Cumminrrs.M. 1-5 April 1991. and HUANG. Proceedings of third symposium on Expert systems application to power system..G.. pp. Philadelphia. ZEEE Trans. (l).A.2 and = 0. January 1997 . IA-16.: ‘The role of fuzzy logic in the management of uncertainty in expert systems’. C. pp. pp. 1982) XU. ES and ANN are effective diagnosis tools. C. 1965.ANN for fault diagnosis of power transformers. No. but they have some disadvantages. and ZHOU. The paper determines = 0. it is added to by some independent rules through ANN learning.: ‘Fuzzy sets’. 8. . L. WANG.. Power Deliv. 338-353 ZADEH. the ES knowledge base will be enlarged continuously. Technol. Another consultative mechanism with ES as the leading part can also be proposed. KEPRI. the ES knowledge base contains Table 2. 642-647 ZADEH. Z.: ‘Impulse test fault diagnosis on power transformers using Kohonen’s self-organizing neural network’.J. Tokyo-Kobe. The function of ANN is knowledge acquisition. ANN is the main means of fault diagnosis. Tajeon. 7 References 1 KELLY.: ‘Applications of fuzzy set theory and expert system for fault diagnosis of transformer’.pp. 1980. 1978 LIN.: ‘Fuzzy’ set theory-and its applications’ (Kluwer-Nijhoff.V.. STP998’ (American Society for Testing and Materials. the conclusion of the consultative mechanism is believable.-Sei. W. Appl. ANN needs a great number of training samples which reflect many kinds of faults. Meas. D. 144. 231-238 BAUNANN..