On-Line Partial Discharge (PD)

Detection in 420kv Bushings,

Used to Confirm Periodic, Off-Line
DGA, To Increase System Reliability
and End-User Service Continuity

By

Brian Sparling, SMIEEE, Dynamic Ratings

and
Mark Tostrud P.E., Dynamic Ratings

TechCon North America 2016 – Albuquerque, NM

 On-Line Partial Discharge (PD) Detection in 420kv Bushings
Used to Confirm Periodic, Off-Line DGA, to Increase System
Reliability and End-User Service Continuity
Authors: Brian Sparling, SMIEEE, Dynamic Ratings
Mark Tostrud P.E., Dynamic Ratings

Abstract

A Utility was confronting growing maintenance and outage risks related to a population of
420kV bushings of a certain vintage with high failure rates. The unexpected failures were
resulting in extended loss of service to its customers and unplanned labor and maintenance
expense.

Periodic off-line testing of PF and capacitance did not always detect a failure condition. DGA
sampling of the oil from some of the suspect bushings, did exhibit classic signatures for Partial
Discharge of oil/paper insulation systems.

An on-line electrical partial discharge (PD) detection and bushing monitoring system was
installed on a 400kV, 125MVAR reactor. The work reported is shared here, and will show the
correlation of increased DGA levels and the rate of On-Line Partial Discharge activity, in two of
the three bushings on this reactor.

This technique demonstrated that on-line Electric PD detection provides the early warning of
incipient failure conditions inside the bushings, before increases in leakage currents, and of-line
Power Factor and/or capacitance testing.

KEY WORDS: Bushings, DGA, Electrical Partial Discharge Detection,

Introduction

During the past two years, a series of unexpected bushing failures (sometimes catastrophic) have
occurred with a transmission utility, operating a 400kV network. This higher than normal rate of
failure prompted further testing which included off-line power factor and capacitance
measurements. This testing did not always detect a failure condition. DGA sampling of the oil
from some of the suspect bushings, did exhibit classic signatures for Partial Discharge of
oil/paper insulation systems. The bushings were of a certain make and vintage, and were
installed on various auto-transformers and reactors. Investigations into what could have been a
root cause of failure were inconclusive.

Solutions included, wholesale replacement of this make of OIP bushings with another make of
OIP bushings, OR a complete change to RIP bushings. This expensive proposition, led to a
request to investigate, on-line monitoring techniques that could provide the early warning of

TechCon North America 2016 – Albuquerque, NM 1

impending failure. It was decided to install an on-line PD detection and bushing monitoring
system on a 400kV, 125MVAR reactor.

The unit selected has three of the suspect 420kV bushings installed, two of which were revealing
increase DGA levels. The third bushing of the same vintage did not reveal an increase in DGA.

In a normal application and installation (Figures 1 and 2), the bushing and partial discharge
sensors and monitor are used to provide the first alert of an impending problem on a transformer
or reactor.

Figure 1 - Typical Sensor Installation for Bushing & PD Monitoring

The sensors are wired to the bushing and partial discharge monitor using coaxial cables to
provide a low impedance path for the signals as well as to shield the signals from external noise.
The primary sensor for both the bushing and partial discharge monitor are the BAU sensors. The
BAU sensors allow the bushing monitoring system to measure the current from the capacitive tap
of the bushing. The signals from these sensors are then summed to determine the imbalance
current of the system and the imbalance current is trended over time to identify problems in one
or more bushings in the transformer or reactor. Changes in the imbalance current which
correlate with temperature fluctuations are also tracked.

With the partial discharge system, the signals from the BAU sensors and Rogowski coils are
used. The BAU sensors provide the primary diagnostic information for the system while the
signals from the Rogowski coils are used to assist in identifying whether the partial discharge
activity being measured is positive or negative and whether it is coming from inside the
transformer or reactor or from outside sources. Under normal circumstances, one would expect
the partial discharge monitor to detect the problem first. Partial discharge will result in the
generation of gases which will eventually be detectable through oil analysis. If the problem is in
one or more bushings, as the partial discharge activity increases, the paper layers of the C1
capacitor of the bushing will eventually become comprised resulting in changes in the magnitude
and phase angle of the bushing current(s).

TechCon North America 2016 – Albuquerque, NM 2

When a bushing is energized at rated line voltage or at the test voltage during an offline test, a
current is generated which can be measured at the capacitive tap of the bushing. This current is
mainly capacitive in nature as shown in the diagram below.

Figure 2 Bushing Current Vector Diagram

Historically utilities have utilized offline testing to determine the health of the bushings installed
in their transformers and reactors. The majority of these tests are performed by energizing the
bushing at a known voltage and phase angle and measuring the resulting current and phase angle
from the capacitive tap of the bushing to determine the power factor and capacitance of the
bushing. The power factor and capacitance values are then trended over time. While both power
factor and capacitance are monitored in offline tests, capacitance changes provide a better
indication of impending failures. Changes in power factor warn of problems with moisture
ingress or other contamination which will eventually result in changes in capacitance.

To measure power factor and capacitance directly, you need to measure the voltage the bushing
is energized at in addition to the current from the capacitive tap of the bushing. Since the
required voltage signals for both the high and low side bushings are typically not present at the
transformer, real time measurements of power factor and capacitance are not feasible. Hence,
most online systems monitor changes in the current from the capacitive tap (IBAU) and the
associated phase angle (vector) to identify impending failures, not the power factor and
capacitance values of the bushings. While power factor and capacitance values are calculated,
these values are estimated based on the changes in the magnitude and phase angle of the bushing
currents relative a system reference. To minimize the effect of system voltage fluctuations, the
system trends the currents over time to identify if the changes are power factor or capacitive in
nature and then adjusts the readings based on these trends. Since the values are trended over
time, only steady state changes in power factor and capacitance may be reported while any
changes in the imbalance current are reported immediately. Hence, the imbalance current
provides a better indication of impending failures.

TechCon North America 2016 – Albuquerque, NM 3

The Rest of the Case

Within days after installing the bushing and partial discharge monitor on the transformer, the
partial discharge monitor went into alarm. The system consisted of the sensors as shown in
figure 2.

Figure 3 Typical Installation of the System and Sensors

If an alarm is received from the monitor, the data should be reviewed to determine the
appropriate response. The data review typically includes a review of the magnitudes, trends and
rate of change of each of the signals being measured by the monitor. The data may also be
graphed with temperature, humidity, system voltages, load and other transformer data to look for
correlations. Typical actions following the data analysis may include;

1. Continue to monitor the equipment with the online system

2. Connect the PD sensors to an oscilloscope to view the data in real time on an oscilloscope

3. Schedule additional offline tests – power factor, DGA, SFRA, etc.

4. Remove the equipment from service immediately and perform additional offline tests to
confirm the information reported by the monitor.

Following the alarm, data was downloaded and sent to Dynamic Ratings for analysis. The
partial discharge monitor showed discharge activity on 2 of the 3 phases. At the same time, a
main tank DGA sample was taken and data from the two gas DGA monitor installed on the main
tank was downloaded. Both the online and offline DGA data for the main tank indicated that the
gases were stable and were not increasing. Analysis of the partial discharge signatures also

TechCon North America 2016 – Albuquerque, NM 4

indicated that the discharges did not appear to be coming from the main tank. Since the bushings
had been recently tested, a decision was made to continue monitoring the transformer.

Over the course of the next few weeks, the data from the monitor was downloaded on a regular
basis and analyzed by Dynamic Ratings. During this time, the monitor reported periods of high
activity and low activity which is typical during the beginning stages of a failure. The data
downloads indicated that the discharges were occurring in the bushings in 2 of the 3 phases.
Finally, following a series of alarms from the monitor, the equipment was removed from service
so that they could take a DGA sample from the bushings. The information from the monitor,
combined with the DGA and offline test data indicated there were some serous defects in two of
the three bushings.

A summary of the data from the monitors and the DGA data from the bushings is provided
below.

R Phase Bushing

DGA Laboratory test results (ppm) 125MVAR ‘R’ Phase Bushing

Date H2 CH4 C2H4 C2H6 C2H2 CO CO2

April 15 2014 17 2 3 0 0 60 356

Nov 29 2014 625 46 0 7 0 95 513
Jan 7 2015 1262 88 4 16 0 95 515
Feb 14 2015 2378 147 1 26 2 104 512
Table 1, DGA History for ‘R” Phase bushing
Utilizing Duval Triangle Number 4, this set of results, reflects the presence of PD.

Additional analysis of the monitor data is provided below.

PD Record Channel 1 – R Phase Bushing

Channel 1 of the monitor was connected to the R phase bushing. Over the monitoring period,
frequent discharges which often exceed the high-high alarm set point were recorded. The graph
shown in Figure 4 shows the trend of the partial discharge intensity (mW) values over a period of
15 days.

TechCon North America 2016 – Albuquerque, NM 5

 Figure 4 - Channel 1 - R Phase Bushing PD Intensity (mW)

The phase resolved data shown in figure 5 is associated with the highest discharge recorded over
this 15 day period. The signature is typical of activity between the C1 insulation and the
porcelain of the bushing. Similar activity was recorded for each discharge exceeding the alarm
threshold and for many other discharges over the monitoring period.

Figure 5 - Phase Resolved Data from Channel 1 - R Phase Bushing on 3/19/2015 at 11:53:00

TechCon North America 2016 – Albuquerque, NM 6

Y Phase Bushing
DGA Laboratory test results (ppm) 125MVAR ‘Y’ Bushing

Date H2 CH4 C2H4 C2H6 C2H2 CO CO2

April 15 2014 15 0 3 0 0 63 177

Nov 29 2014 47 2 0 1 0 110 249
Jan 7 2015 361 16 4 0 0 82 224
Feb 14 2015 1180 111 30 26 0 54 287
Table 2 DGA History for ‘Y’ Phase Bushing
Utilizing Duval Triangle Number 4, this set of results, reflects the presence of PD.

PD Record Channel 2 – ‘Y’ Phase Bushing

Over the monitoring period, channel 2 of the monitor, which was connected to the Y phase
bushing, reported periodic discharges which exceed the warning set point. The graph in Figure 6
details the trend of the partial discharge intensity (mW) values over a 15 day period. While the
magnitude of the discharges recorded on channel 2 are less, and the discharges seldom exceed
the warning set point, the phase resolved data shows some interesting characteristics.

Figure 6 - Channel 2 - Y Phase Bushing

When the monitor was first installed, the phase resolved data on channel 2 looked similar to the
phase resolved data shown for channel 1 above. However, after the first few weeks, the
signature pattern changed. Figure 7 shows the new signature pattern which was frequently seen
on channel 2 after the first few weeks.

While the magnitude of the impulses do not exceed the alarm threshold, it is interesting to note
that the monitor was now recording positive impulses of the same polarity as the sine wave while

TechCon North America 2016 – Albuquerque, NM 7

the signatures recorded over the first 30 days showed negative impulses. The change in the
signature pattern indicates that the PD activity appears to have shifted from between the C1
insulation and the porcelain to a signature we would expect if the activity were occurring in the
C1 insulation of the bushing.

Figure 7 - Phase Resolved Data from Channel 2 – ‘Y’ Phase Bushing on 3/23/2015 at 13:13:00

Partial discharge activity occurring in the C1 insulation system will likely lead to changes in the
C1 capacitance of the bushing and drive changes in the bushing imbalance current. Since the
partial discharge activity is now occurring within the C1 insulation, additional gassing should be
expected.

B Phase Bushing

DGA Laboratory test results (ppm) 125MVAR ‘B’ Phase Bushing

Date H2 CH4 C2H4 C2H6 C2H2 CO CO2

April 15 2014 42 0 4 0 0 77 526

Nov 29 2014 72 2 0 0 0 151 903
Jan 7 2015 50 2 2 0 0 123 891
Feb 14 2015 54 3 2 0 0 135 944

Table 3 DGA History for ‘B’ Phase Bushing

Utilizing Duval Triangle Number 4 resulted in no determination, as all of the values for the gases
of interest, were below the ‘norms’ acceptable.

TechCon North America 2016 – Albuquerque, NM 8

Bushing Monitor Measured Imbalance Current

Figure 8 shows the imbalance current recorded by the bushing monitor over the entire
monitoring period. During the first 30 days, the graph shows the imbalance current was fairly
stable. While the monitor recorded several spikes in the imbalance current, the readings return to
normal after a few hours. The spikes in imbalance current are believed to be due to system
voltage fluctuations since the current from each bushing fluctuated during these same periods.
System voltage data showed that the voltages were fluctuating during these periods but an exact
determination could not be made since the time stamps were different. If these signals are
available at the transformer, the monitor could be programmed to record this information to
provide a direct correlation.

Figure 8 - Bushing Monitor Imbalance Trend

While the imbalance current was initially stable, figure 8 shows a slight upward trend in the last
few weeks. An increasing trend in the imbalance current is expected as the health of one or more
bushings degrades. Should partial discharge activity continue to degrade the C1 insulation in
one or more bushings, changes in the bushings C1 capacitance would be expected which will
drive the imbalance current upward. The bushing monitor warning and alarm set points are set
to 4% and 6% respectively. Changes in the imbalance current trend and the rate of change
should be considered in addition to the magnitude when considering whether to remove the
equipment from service.

Summary

The Dynamic Ratings Partial Discharge Monitor installed on a 400 kV Reactor at this station
reported partial discharge activity that directly correlated with the DGA analyses that was
performed on the bushings. The activity recorded on the R phase bushing has a signature which
appears to correlate with PD activity between the C1 insulation and the porcelain of the bushing.
The activity reported on the Y phase bushing has a signature which correlates with PD activity in
the C1 insulation of the bushing.

TechCon North America 2016 – Albuquerque, NM 9

All three bushings have been removed and replaced with a different make (manufacturer) of OIP
bushings.

The long term plan is to move to RIP type bushings.

Biography

Brian D. Sparling, a Senior Member of IEEE, is a Regional Manager

with Dynamic Ratings Inc.

Brian has over twenty years of experience in the field of power and
distribution transformers. For the last 23 years he has been involved in
all aspects of monitoring and diagnostics and condition assessment of
power transformers.

He has authored and co-authored more than 20 technical papers on

various topics dealing with the monitoring and diagnostics of transformers.

He has worked on many guides and standards with the Canadian Electricity Association,
IEEE Transformers Committee and, the CIGRÉ A2 Transformer committee.

Biography

Mark Tostrud is the Technology Officer for Dynamic Ratings, Inc.

His responsibilities include assisting customers with the design and

implementation of their monitoring programs and helping customers
troubleshoot problems through the analysis of their monitoring data.
Prior to his present position, Mark was a Construction & Maintenance
Supervisor at We Energies. During his 19 years at We Energies, Mark
led the implementation of many of the condition based monitoring
programs for We Energies’ substation equipment. Mark is a past chair
of the Tech Con Conference and was an active member on various
Doble Committees and Subcommittees including the Transformers, Insulating Materials, DGA
of LTCs and others.

Mark is a registered professional engineer in the State of Wisconsin.

TechCon North America 2016 – Albuquerque, NM 10