Use of Gas Concentrations Ratios to Interpret LTC

Dissolved Gas Data

Fredi Jakob, Karl Jakob, Simon Jones
Weidmann-ACTI
Rick Youngblood
Cinergy Corporation

I. Introduction
Fifteen years ago a common belief was that dissolved gas analysis, DGA, was not
applicable to oil circuit breakers, OCBs or load tap changers, LTCs. This assumption
was based on the idea that the gases produced during normal operation of an OCB or
LTC would be more significant than gases produced by a fault process such as contact
overheating.
The association of certain fault gases with fault types or key gas DGA interpretation
method is summarized in Table 1. These empirical correlations were developed for main
tanks of transformers but are applicable to any type of oil filled electrical apparatus. This
concept led investigators such as Youngblood1 to theorize that specific fault gases are
formed when arcing under oil occurs, which is a normal process in an LTC. Overheating,
an abnormal process in an LTC, produces different key gasses. Specifically, he
suggested that acetylene and hydrogen are generated during the normal arcing process
and the hydrocarbons, methane, ethane and especially ethylene are generated when
overheating occurs in a problem LTC. These three hydrocarbons are often called hot
metal gases since they are produced when a heated conductor is in contact with mineral
oil based dielectric fluid.
1

Table 1. Key Fault Gasses.

Gasses

Indication

Hydrogen

Partial Discharge, Heating Arcing

Ethylene, Ethane, Methane

Hot Metal Gasses

Acetylene

Arcing

Carbon Oxides

Cellulose insulation degradation

II. Data Interpretation.

A. Concept
The interpretation of DGA data for transformers, LTCs and OCBs is empirical in
nature. The development of interpretation protocols for OCBs and LTCs parallels the
development of DGA diagnostics for the main tanks of transformers. Key gases
associated with heating problems are methane, ethane and ethylene. These gases are
listed by Halstead2 in order of increasing energy required for their production. Initially
Youngblood ignored the levels of arcing gases, acetylene and hydrogen that developed
whenever an LTC operated. Subsequent work by Youngblood5 indicated that arcing gases
are also diagnostically significant. For example, increased acetylene levels were often
followed by increased heating gases. The increased acetylene is due to changes in the arc
duration and/or characteristics as the contacts are eroded or covered with carbon.
The next step in the development of diagnostic protocols for LTCs was the empirical
determination of normal or threshold values. The gas retention rate in an LTC is very
dependent on breathing configuration, so this is a major factor in determining threshold

levels. Free breathing LTCs rapidly lose gases to the environment while sealed LTCs
retain most of the gas produced.
Threshold levels have been determined for specific models and types of LTCs by
Doble3 and Baker4. Generic levels have been set by Youngblood5, and are useful for
specific LTC models where the threshold values have not yet been determined. Fault gas
ratios should be considered applicable for unit evaluation only when threshold values are
reached.

B. Fault Gas Concentration Ratios.

1. Normal Operation
Arcing, which generates very high temperatures, occurs with each switching
operation in an LTC. Arcing produces acetylene and hydrogen. When arcing gases are
being produced, heating gases are also produced since the oil temperature varies with
distance from the arcing contacts. At the lower oil temperatures, heating gases are
produced rather than acetylene.
If one accepts this hypothesis, one would expect that the ratios of heating to arcing
gases in a problem free unit would remain fairly constant with operational count. Since
the contact surface is being eroded and additional deposits are being formed with each
operation, these ratios will predictably increase slightly with operation count. The data
presented in a paper by Duval5 supports this hypothesis. Note that all of the significant
ratios in these problem free units are well below those found in a LTC that has developed
a heating or other problem.

2. Heating Problems
Initially a resistive film develops on contacts, which results in an increase in contact
resistance, increased heating and an increase in heating gas concentrations. Since more
heating gases are now being produced, the ratio of heating to arcing gases increases. This
change in gas concentrations and gas concentration ratios indicates problems. As the
resistance increases, the amount of energy dissipated increases. The ratios of ethane to
methane and ethylene to ethane both increase with increasing temperature. Thus these
two heating gas ratios should also reflect increased contact resistance and heating.
Table 2. Gas Formation as a Function of Operation Count. (Duval5)
Operations:
500
3600
49000
Gas produced/operation
Gas/500

Gas/3600

Gas/49000

Hydrogen

6870

12125

14320

13.74

3.37

0.29

Methane

1028

5386

10740

2.05

1.50

0.22

Acetylene

5500

35420

53670

11.00

9.84

1.10

Ethylene

900

6400

35839

1.80

1.78

0.73

Ethane

79

400

3944

0.16

0.11

0.08

*Note: Some gas is always lost with time. Therefore, the gas concentration per
operation is expected to decrease with operation count. Duval did not provide breathing
configurations for this data.

Heating to Arcing Ratios

Ethylene
Acetylene + Hydrogen

Ethylene
Acetylene

Temperature Dependant Ratios

Ethane
Methane

Ethylene
Ethane

Methane + Ethylene + Ethane

Acetylene + Hydrogen

C. Application of Gas Concentration Ratios.

As is the case with main tank DGA, ratios are not valid unless at least one of the
fault gases exceeds its threshold value. Threshold values used by Weidmann-ACTI are
model specific, whenever this data is available. If model specific data is not available,
we use the monthly watch levels developed by Youngblood5 as our threshold values.
Normal values we use for the ratios represent the 90th percentile of fault gas
concentrations from a very large number of DGA results (~2500 units). These 90th
percentile values which are listed in Table 3 are generic and do not take into account the
difference in gassing rates of specific units. Ratios are, as expected, model specific.
Table 4 lists the ratios calculated for a Westinghouse LTC, which according to Bakers5
threshold levels requires attention.

R1

Table 3. Generic 90th Percentile Fault Gas Ratios.

R2
R3

Ethylene

Ethylene

Ethylene + Ethane + Methane

Acetylene

Acetylene + Hydrogen

Acetylene + Hydrogen

R4

R5

Ethylene

Ethane

Ethane

Methane

0.2067
0.3378

0.5000

0.9157

4.83

Note the difference between these model specific ratios listed in Table 4, and the
generic values which are listed in Table 3.

Table 4. Unit Specific Ratio Comparison.

WESTINGHOUSE LTC UTT

Ethylene

Ethane

Methane

Acetylene

Hydrogen

CO

CO2

3,000

10,000

LT3 Gas
Level
3,000

250

1,000

5,000

5,000

Ratio 1

Ratio 2

Ratio 3

Ratio 4

Ratio 5

0.60

0.30

0.43

0.25

12

McGRAW EDISON LTC 550-BL

LT3
2,000

400

400

400

500

Ratio 1

Ratio 2

Ratio 3

Ratio 4

Ratio 5

5.00

2.22

3.11

1.00

1,000

3,000

* LT3 is Bakers designation of a unit requiring inspection.

III. Case Studies

Two case studies for Cinergy data are presented below. This data, from Cinergys
initial work, was interpreted without consideration of fault gas concentration ratios. Case
history II is of particular interest since serious damage occurred in the six month interval
between scheduled tests. The data indicates that critical gas ratios such as the ratio of
ethylene to acetylene doubled from March 92 to Feb 93. This points out the necessity
of trending both ratios and gas concentrations. We believe that the extent of the coking
would have been less severe if the unit had been inspected in Feb 93 based on the
doubling of the significant ratios, rather than to have waited for six additional months.
6

IV. Future Work

The empirical analysis of DGA data for LTCs is well developed. Gas
concentration levels and gas concentration ratios can differentiate between normal and
problem units. We believe that both the concentration and ratio values will work best if
they are model specific. The compilation of these values requires user feedback on
problem units. Trending of both the gas concentrations and ratios is always the best
method to identify incipient problems.
Another concept under investigation is normalization of fault gas data. We
believe that during normal switching operations, the ratio of ethylene to acetylene is
fixed. This ratio should remain constant for different numbers of operations.
Furthermore, since these two gases have approximately the same solubility in mineral oil
and approximately the same escape rates from the oil, the ratios should remain fairly
constant even for free breathing units. For example if the concentration of both ethylene
and acetylene are 100 ppm then the ratio is one. If a heating problem is superimposed on
the normal arcing process and the gas levels are 175 ppm for ethylene and 150 ppm for
acetylene there would be an additional 25 ppm of ethylene due to the heating problem.
One could thus normalize our results using a ratio of:

ethylene(due _ to _ heating )
acetylene(due _ to _ arcing )

total _ ethylene (ethylene _ produced _ during _ normal _ arcing )

acetylene

LTC Case Study I

Westinghouse UTT-A 138KV x 69KV x 13.8KV Sealed
Date
8/31/92
12/17/93
5/1/94
8/17/95

Comments
Removed from Service
Post Repair
Normal
placed on 6 month watch

C2H2
8527
501
541
648

CH4
3279
387
534
590

C2H6
1135
16
9
52

C2H4
9606
375
313
836

H2
9083
2883
3800
3995

Date
8/31/1992
12/17/1993
5/1/1994
8/17/1995

Comments
Removed from Service
Post Repair
Normal
Placed on 6 Month Watch

Ratio 1
1.13
0.75
0.58
1.29

Ratio 2
0.55
0.11
0.07
0.18

Ratio 3
0.8
0.23
0.2
0.32

Ratio 4
0.35
0.06

Ratio 5
0.15
0.09

Ratio 1
Ratio2
Ratio3
Ratio4
Ratio5

C2H4 / C2H2
C2H4 / (C2H2 + H2)
(CH4 + C2H4 + C2H6) / (C2H2 + H2)
C2H6 / CH4
C2H4 / C2H6

31-Aug-92
Based on the DGA result this unit was immediately removed from service. The fault
was determined to be due to contact misalignment.
17-Dec-93
Typical levels of gasses for a sealed, unit, annual monitoring was indicated.
1-May-94
Again gas levels are typical for a sealed unit, annual monitoring continued.
17-August-95
Again the Gas levels are indicative on normal operation, however the fifty percent increase
in the level of Acetylene indicated increased surveillance.

LTC Case Study II

Federal Pacific TC-25 69KV x 12KV 20MVA Desiccant Breather
Date
Comments
3/12/1992 Annual DGA Test Cycle
2/1/1993
6 Month Test Cycle
8/12/1993
Thermal Runaway

Date
3/12/92
2/1/93
8/12/93

Comments
Annual DGA Test Cycle
6 Month Test Cycle
Thermal Runaway

Ratio 1
Ratio2
Ratio3
Ratio4
Ratio5

C2H2
589
1625
1633

CH4
60
342
53434

C2H6
2
70
55535

Ratio 1
0.15
0.32
155

Ratio 2
0.12
0.11
66

Ratio 3
0.21
0.2
94

C2H4
89
534
253024

Ratio 4
0.21
1.03

H2
144
3099
2217

Ratio 5
0.15
0.33
155

C2H4 / C2H2
C2H4 / (C2H2 + H2)
(CH4 + C2H4 + C2H6) / (C2H2 + H2)
C2H6 / CH4
C2H4 / C2H6

12-Mar-92
This unit indicated the early stages of mechanical difficulties. While the
Acetylene and Hydrogen levels are elevated, the level of Ethylene is less than 100
ppm. Indicating a continuance of annual monitoring
1-Feb-93
At this time the unit was placed on a 6 month monitoring, due to the elevated,
Acetylene, Hydrogen, and Ethylene levels. At 534 ppm Ethylene immediate
removal from service was not indicated.

12-Aug-96
Too late, by August, the unit was in thermal runaway. As indicated by the extremely
high level of Ethylene, at 253,024 ppm. Repairs included a Tap Shaft board, Slip
Rings, and a New Reversing Switch assembly.

References:

1. Youngblood, R., Jacob, F., Haupert, T.J. Application of DGA to Detection of Hot
Spots in Load Tap-Changers, Minutes of the Sixtieth Annual International
Conference of Doble Clients, 1993, Sec. 6-4.1.
2. Halstead, W. D., A Thermodynamic Assessment of the Formation of Gaseous
Hydrocarbons in Faulty Transformers, Journal of the Institute of Petroleum, Vol. 59,
Sept. 1959, pp. 239-241.
3. Doble Client Transformer Committee Subcommittee Report on Transformer Load
Tap Changer Dissolved Gas Analysis September 24, 2001.
4. Baker, Charles. Personal correspondence. 2002.
5. Youngblood, R., Baker, C., Jacob, F., Perjanik, N. Application of Dissolved Gas
Analysis to Load Tap Changers.
6. Duval, Michel. A Review of Faults Detectable by gas-in-Oil Analysis in
Transformers. IEEE Electrical Insulation Magazine May/June 2002, Vol. 18 no. 3,
pp. 8-17.

10