21, rue d’Artois, F-75008 PARIS A2 - 102 CIGRE 2018

http : //www.cigre.org

Experimental Validation of a Thermal Hydraulic Management Platform for

Core-Type Power Transformers

M. A. QUINTELA, A. C. BARRADAS, S. COUTO, E. COSTA, H. M. R. CAMPELO*

Power Transformers Research and Development
EFACEC Energia, S.A
Portugal

SUMMARY

Considerable thermal modelling efforts in power transformers have been reported in literature over the
last years. Advanced and detailed numerical techniques such as Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD)
and Thermal Hydraulic Network Models (THNM) are being applied either to enhance the
comprehension about the products or to enhance the capabilities of predicting and forecasting the
thermal performance of power transformers. However, in most literature examples, such techniques are
being applied to restricted and decoupled domains inside power transformers (i.e. the windings, the
radiators, …). This means that the resulting decoupled models are highly dependent on the availability
of accurate compounded boundary conditions and are not self-sufficient to predict the integrated
behaviour of a power transformer using the basic boundary conditions available at the design stages or
on-site during its operating life.
Hence, this work describes how these challenges can be potentially addressed with a Thermal Hydraulic
Management Platform (THMP). In this platform, all the relevant components of a power transformer
are modelled using the same network modelling principles already developed and validated for the
restricted domain of the windings, either core-type and shell-type. In this concept, both inlet and outlet
boundary conditions are shared between connected components enabling an integrated prediction of the
thermal performance of a power transformer based on its geometrical characteristics, on its materials
properties, on its losses, on ambient conditions and on the performance curves from pumps and fans.
To assess the numerical accuracy of the THMP, a first comparison with the temperature rise test results
of a commercial 40 MVA ODAF cooled transformer is presented. The comparison reveals temperature
predictions with deviations lower than 3 ºC and total oil mass flow rate predictions with deviations lower
than 6%. To extend the experimental validation of the developed THMP platform, an experimental and
real scale 15 MVA ODAF core-type three-phase power transformer has been built exclusively for this
purpose. This exclusive environment for dedicated R&D activities will be subject of future interest and
activities over the coming years so its main characteristics are also briefly described in this work.

KEYWORDS
Power Transformer – CFD – THNM – THMP – Thermal Modelling – Digital Twin

hugo.campelo@efacec.com
I. Introduction

Power transformers are among the most valuable and complex assets in the electrical grid and significant
efforts are being made by both manufacturers and utilities to increase their efficiency and service
lifetime. One of the main parameters limiting the power output and driving the ageing of transformers
is temperature. Although transformers are extremely efficient devices, part of the electrical energy is
inexorably converted into heat, which causes an internal temperature increase that together with other
parameters, such as oxygen and moisture, promotes the ageing of the transformer. According to IEC
60076-7, the normal ageing rate of the transformer paper and hence the transformer itself is 98 ºC and
by every 6 ºC of temperature increase, the transformer service lifetime decreases by half. Therefore, the
comprehension and the capability to model the physics that drives the ageing phenomena in transformer
is of high interest. When it comes to the temperature distribution inside of transformers, Computational
Fluid Dynamics (CFD) and Thermal Hydraulic Network Models (THNM) are recognized to be the state-
of the-art approaches to model the thermal-hydraulic behaviour of transformers [1]. Both techniques
have been successfully used over the last two decades to evaluate and better understand the cooling
mechanisms influencing the thermal performance of both core-type and shell-type power transformers
[2] [3] [4]. Although these techniques are conceptually different, both tend to coexist integrated in
different stages of the product life cycle with complementary purposes [5] [6]. In CFD, the principles
governing the fluid flow and heat transfer in both fluid and solid domains are described using differential
equations that are replaced by algebraic equations and solved at discrete points [7]. For this reason, CFD
is considered the most accurate numerical technique, however is also the most demanding technique in
terms of computational and human resources. On the other hand, in THNM, the same principles are
described using simpler algebraic equations that rely on analytical and/or empirical coefficients. Even
though these equations in the THNM are also solved at discrete points, the flow profile is not solved,
and therefore, singular and local phenomena might not be captured [2]. Nevertheless, THNM models
have proven to be sufficient accurate when compared with CFD simulations and experimental results.
For this reason, THNM models are more attractive for design purposes due to its reduced time-to-
solution and easier integration with other proprietary models. Although, both techniques have been
driving and enhancing the comprehension of the thermal-hydraulic behaviour of transformers, they have
been used to investigate restricted and decoupled domains, such as the windings domain. This means
that, from a thermal-hydraulic perspective, both techniques are highly dependent of the boundary
conditions used, such as the total oil flow rate and the bottom oil temperature. When those quantities
are unknown (e.g. during the transformer design stage and even during its operation), predicting the
average and hotspot winding temperatures with confidence may not be feasible, mainly when unusual
geometric or operating conditions need to be evaluated. Although modelling the global thermal-
hydraulic system of the power seems to be the most preferable approach, conduct this task using CFD
simulation still seems unfeasible due the computational and human resources needed. To balance these
challenges, the knowledge acquired by the authors over the last decade from CFD and THNM techniques
have been used to develop a proprietary global model, being the underlying concept named here as
Thermal Hydraulic Management Platform (THMP). The development of this THMP platform is part of
an internal R&D roadmap that envisages the development of a Transformer Digital Twin where
Multiphysics is expected to be integrated to predict the ultimate ageing distribution under steady and
unsteady operating conditions. This paper therefore presents the THMP platform, as well as its
comparison against the temperature rise test results of a commercial transformer and against 3D-CFD
simulations of an experimental setup that has been built and will be used for further experimental
comparisons.

II. THMP Concept

The THMP platform is an integrated and interdependent thermal model comprising physical
descriptions of all the components relevant to the thermal performance of a transformer. For the time
being, it has been primarily developed for core-type power transformers but the concept is expected to
be further extended to other types or sub-types of both distribution and power transformers. In this
platform each component has its own THNM (herein called sub model), based on the same techniques
already applied to the windings, being each component further connected to each other. Conceptually,

2
the platform depends on the transformer geometrical characteristics, on its materials properties, on its
losses, on ambient conditions and on the performance curves from pumps and fans. As outputs, the
platform can calculate the temperature distribution in each of the components modelled with
customizable levels of detail.
Since the parameters are mainly geometrical conditions, no boundary conditions, such as oil flow rate
and bottom oil temperature are needed to conduct any calculation, instead, those quantities are solved
numerically.
This capability is relevant during the design stage when FAT data is still unknown for that particular
design and when the influence of each component shall be analysed integrated in the whole system (i.e.,
for example to analyse the influence of using a specific pipe dimension or a specific valve type).
In this section, the concept of the THMP platform is described using a schematic ODAF transformer
arrangement including the active part, two pipes, two elbows, one pump and one radiator (Figure 1).

4 5
1 3 ① active part
2
② pipe
③ elbow
④ elbow
⑤ radiator
7 6
⑥ pipe
⑦ pump

Figure 1. Schematic ODAF transformer arrangement.

To compute the thermal-hydraulic behaviour of system above, each of the 7 components and their
respective connections should be represented into a piping diagram, as shown in Figure 2. Numerically,
each connection means that the computed boundary conditions (total pressure, mass flow and fluid
temperature) are shared between both sections of the respective connection. For instance, the connection
represented in Figure 2 between the active part and the downstream pipe, means that the computed outlet
boundary conditions of the active part are imposed as inlet boundary conditions in the downstream pipe.

pipe elbow elbow

active
radiator
part

pump pipe
Figure 2. Corresponding piping diagram of the schematic transformer above.

The properties of each component, such as dimensions and characteristics curves, shall be specified.
Some examples of relevant properties related to each component of the above transformer are presented
in Figure 3.

3
 pipe active part
pipe dimensions (diameter, length, tank dimensions (length, width,
wall thickness, roughness) height, wall thickness, …)
material number, location and diameter of oil
… inlets/ outlets
winding dimensions
elbow
…
elbow dimensions (radius, length,
wall thickness, roughness) radiator
material manifold dimensions (diameter, wall
… thickness, …)
number of plates
pump
plate dimensions (height, width)
characteristic curve plate to plate distance
… …

Figure 3. Examples of components properties assigned in THMP platform.

The diagram in Figure 4 describes the main logical blocks of the platform (from the input data towards
post processing).

start

read component properties and

respective interconnections

run the initialization routines (geometric, thermal and hydraulic)

run the thermal-hydraulic submodel of each component

run the global thermal-hydraulic model

compute thermal and hydraulic deviations

convergence

run postprocessing routines

end

Figure 4. Flowchart of the methodology implemented in THMP platform to

compute the thermal-hydraulic behaviour of the transformer.

After reading the properties of each component and interpreting the dependencies/connections, the
THMP proceeds with the:

1. geometric initialization: to discretize components (e.g. windings) and to compute geometric

quantities that are constants throughout the calculation process (e.g. hydraulic and convective
areas, volumes, distances, geometric ratios, etc.);
2. thermal initialization: to impose an initial temperature field, as well as to compute thermal
quantities that are constants throughout the calculation process (e.g. thermal resistances, heat
sources, etc.);
3. hydraulic initialization: to impose an initial flow field, as well as to compute hydraulic quantities
that are constants throughout the calculation process (e.g. Poiseuille numbers, etc.).

After running the initialization routines above, the THMP runs the thermal-hydraulic sub model of each
component. Contrary to CFD, where the principles governing the fluid flow and heat transfer are
described through differential equations solved at discrete points [7], the THMP platform describes
those principles using simpler algebraic equations based on analytical and/or empirical coefficients.
Those simpler algebraic equations are then transformed into their equivalents so an analogy with an

4
electrical circuit can be applied to solve pressure, flow and temperature though the Kirchhoff’s circuit
laws. The similarities between the implicit quantities between the different circuits are presented in
Table I.

Table I. Analogies between thermal, hydraulic and electrical circuits

Thermal Circuit Hydraulic Circuit Electrical Circuit
Potential Δ𝑇 (℃) Δ𝑃 (𝑃𝑎) Δ𝑉 (𝑉)
Flow 𝑄 (𝑊) 𝑞 (𝑘𝑔 𝑠 −1 ) 𝐼 (𝐴)
Resistance 𝑅𝑡 (℃ 𝑊 −1 ) 𝑅ℎ (𝑃𝑎 𝑘𝑔−1 𝑠) 𝑅𝑣 (𝑉 𝐴−1 )
Conductance 𝐶 𝑡 (℃−1 𝑊) 𝐶 ℎ (𝑃𝑎−1 𝑘𝑔 𝑠 −1 ) 𝐶 𝑣 (𝑉 −1 𝐴)

Then, it is necessary to run the global thermal-hydraulic model, which main function is computing the
total oil flow rate. To achieve that, the global thermal-hydraulic model also applies an electrical circuit
analogy. Figure 5 shows how the total pressure 𝑃, the total oil mass flow 𝑞 and the hydraulic resistance
𝑅 ℎ are related through an electrical circuit analogy.

𝑃 𝑅ℎ 𝑃 𝑅ℎ 𝑃 𝑅ℎ 𝑃

𝑅1ℎ 𝑞 𝑅ℎ

𝑃1 𝑅ℎ 𝑃 𝑅ℎ 𝑃

Figure 5. Example of an electric circuit analogy of an ODAF transformer.

Since the hydraulic resistance of each component is not constant and is function of temperature, the
calculation process must be repeated until the convergence criterion be respected, i.e., until the thermal
and hydraulic deviations between two consecutive iterations be lower than an admissible value.

III. THMP Validation - FAT

In this section, the THMP platform results are compared against the temperature rise test results of a
commercial 40 MVA ODAF core-type three phase transformer used in a highly compact mobile
substation (having high current densities producing 600 kW in a limited space).
The transformer has four windings per phase – high voltage winding (HV), low voltage winding (LV),
regulation winding (REG) and tertiary winding (TERT) – and is equipped with two pumps and two
compact air heat exchangers. The performance curves of the pumps and of the heat exchangers have
been both provided by the suppliers and inputted to the THMP platform.
As usual in a commercial transformer, the oil flow rate has not been measured directly and both main
windings were equipped with fibre optics sensors located at the top of the winding to measure the hotspot
temperature (HV an LV). Thus, the comparison is focused on the temperatures on the main windings
and on the total oil flow rate that has been indirectly estimated though energy balances [4]. The winding
heat loss distribution, presented in Figure 6, has been computed through a two-dimensional finite
element method (external to the platform) and applied as a boundary condition in the THMP platform.
In average, the loss densities are 39 W.dm-2 and 45 W.dm-2 for the HV and LV windings, respectively.

5
 75
70 LV winding
65 HV winding
60
55
50
45

Disc number
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Loss density (W dm-2)

Figure 6. LV and HV winding heat loss distributions.

The hydraulic model of the THMP platform has predicted a total pressure loss of 79 kPa distributed
among all the components as presented in Figure 7, revealing that more than 90 % of the total pressure
occurs in external components (those outside of the tank).

7%

14% active part

piping
7% valves

61% t-junctions
12%
heat exchangers

Figure 7. Distribution of total pressure loss by each

component computed through THMP platform.

The comparison between the THMP platform results and the temperature rise test results obtained in the
high voltage testing laboratory during its factory acceptance test (FAT) is presented in Table II.

Table II. Comparison between experimental and numerical results of the temperature rises of a commercial 40
MVA ODAF core-type three phase transformer
FAT THMP Deviation
measurements platform (THMP – FAT)
Total oil flow rate 143 m3.h-1 (*) 151 m3.h-1 +5.6 %
Bottom oil temperature rise 26.8 ºC 29.8 ºC +3.0 ºC
Top oil temperature rise 36.4 ºC 38.1 ºC +1.7 ºC
HV average temperature rise 76.1 ºC 76.9 ºC +0.8 ºC
HV hotspot temperature rise 93.9 ºC 95.6 ºC +1.7 ºC
LV average temperature rise 69.2 ºC 66.4 ºC –2.8 ºC
LV hotspot temperature rise 81.0 ºC 78.0 ºC –3.0 ºC
(*) total oil flow rate obtained indirectly (energy balance) using the measured losses and oil temperatures.

Although the absolute oil and winding temperature deviations are lower than 3 ºC and are in accordance
with the uncertainty associated with the sensors and methods used, two notes are made:

1. the THMP platform has overestimated the total oil mass flow rate in +5.6 %;
2. the THMP platform has overestimated the bottom oil temperature rise in +3.0 ºC.

6
The total oil mass flow rate overestimation, promoting an underestimation of the winding temperatures,
can possibly derive from the assumptions used to compute the hydraulic resistance of each component.
Nevertheless a 6% deviation is within the uncertainty range of the indirect oil flow rate measurement
(using the energy balance).
The bottom oil temperature overestimation, promoting an overestimation of the winding temperatures,
can possibly derive from the THMP platform current non-considerations with respect to the heat
dissipation through the tank walls and other components (e.g. piping components). For the current
comparison, all the heat generated has been assumed to be exclusively dissipated through the compact
air heat exchangers.
Since these two overestimations have opposite impacts, average and maximum winding gradients have
been computed and summarized in Table III to enable a better understanding of the winding temperature
deviations.

Table III. Comparison between laboratory and numerical results regarding the winding gradients of a
commercial 40 MVA ODAF core-type three-phase transformer
FAT THMP Deviation
measurements platform (THMP – FAT)
HV average gradient 44.5 ºC 43.0 ºC –1.5 ºC
HV maximum gradient 62.3 ºC 61.7 ºC –0.6 ºC
LV average gradient 37.6 ºC 32.4 ºC –5.2 ºC
LV maximum gradient 49.4 ºC 44.1 ºC –5.3 ºC

From Table III, it is possible to observe that the average and maximum winding gradients predictions
are consistently lower than their respective measurements. The reason for these deviations might come
from the overestimation of 5.6 % in the total oil flow rate. It is also noteworthy that the computed internal
flow distribution might be different from the actual internal flow distribution of the active part, since the
gradient deviations for the LV winding are higher than the ones obtained for the HV windings, –1.5 ºC
and –5.3 ºC, respectively.
However, it is not possible to confirm this based on the temperature rise test results, since it is not
possible to measure the oil flow rate in each individual winding inside the active part.

IV. THMP Validation – 3D-CFD

Figure 8. Experimental setup of a real scale 15 MVA

ODAF core-type three-phase power transformer.

An experimental setup of a real scale 15 MVA ODAF core-type three-phase power transformer has been
built. The aim is to further extend the validations of the THMP in an exclusive environment dedicated
to R&D activities and using a highly instrumented, flexible and adjustable setup. Among other sensors,
the experimental setup has 54 optical fibres distributed along the low voltage and high voltage windings
(18 optical fibers per phase). From a hydraulically perspective, the bottom part of the tank has been
designed in such way that each winding is independent, i.e. the oil flow rate of each winding is controlled

7
and measured through individual instruments and sensors. Moreover, the oil flow rate is pumped through
an in-line pump and measured with an ultrasonic flow meter, and the respective bottom oil temperature
is measured using a PT1000 sensor. This means that the main relevant properties of the oil flowing in
each winding are expected to be known. Although the experimental campaign has not yet started, a
preliminary comparison between the THMP platform and the corresponding 3D-CFD simulation of the
HV winding domain is presented here. The HV winding has 54 discs equally distributed along 6 passes
with a cooling arrangement in zig-zag. The domain of the 3D-CFD simulation represents a half division
of a total of 16 divisions. The hexahedral mesh applied in both domains, solid and fluid, have 13 and 8
million elements, respectively. As shown in Figure 9, the mesh is structured and conformal, and is
refined near the walls to capture the thermal boundary layers around the discs.

Figure 9. Radial section of the mesh used in the

3D-CFD simulations.

As presented in Figure 10, the disc conductors (wrapped with an individual paper layer with 0.7 mm of
thickness) have been modelled in both numerical models (3D-CFD and THNM platform) through an
equivalent conductor wrapped with equal thickness paper to reduce computational resources [8].

conductor (copper)
paper (kraft)
equivalente conductor
(a) (b)

Figure 10. Original disc arrangement (a) and its respective equivalent model (b).

The winding loss distribution, presented in Figure 11, have been computed through a two-dimensional
finite element method (FEM) and applied as boundary condition in the 3D-CFD model and the THMP
platform. For this comparison the bottom oil temperature and the oil flow rate considered are 43.3 ºC
and 15.0 m3.h-1, respectively.

54

49

43

38

33
Disc number

28

22

17

12

1
20 25 30 35 40
HV loss density (W dm -2)

Figure 11. HV winding heat loss

distributions.

8
The winding pressure drop, the top oil temperature and the HV average and maximum temperature
computed through both numerical approaches, 3D-CFD model and the THMP platform, are presented
and compared in Table IV.

Table IV. Comparison between the 3D-CFD model and the respective THMP platform results.
3D-CFD THMP Deviation
model platform (THMP – CFD)
Winding pressure drop 1149 Pa 948 Pa –17 %
Top oil temperature 49.8 ºC 49.8 ºC +0.0 ºC
HV average temperature 70.1 ºC 68.9 ºC –1.2 ºC
HV maximum temperature 87.1 ºC 78.6 ºC –8.5 ºC

From Table IV, it is observable that THMP platform has underestimated the winding total pressure in
17 %. Although in this comparison the total oil flow rate has been imposed, this deviation might
underperform the total oil flow rate prediction and consequently the winding temperatures, when the
total oil flow rate is predicted by THMP platform. From Table IV, it is also observable that THMP
platform has predicted quite well the average winding temperature but misses the maximum winding
temperature. To better criticize and understand the above deviations, both average and maximum
temperature distributions computed along the winding are presented is Figure 12.

54 54
THMP THMP
49 3D-CFD 49 3D-CFD

43 43

38 38

33 33
Disc number

Disc number

28 28

22 22

17 17

12 12

6 6

1 1
50 60 70 80 90 100 50 60 70 80 90 100
Average disc temperature (ºC) Maximum disc temperature (ºC)
(a) (b)
Figure 12. Temperature distribution computed by the 3D-CFD model and the THMP
platform: (a) average disc temperature and (b) maximum disc temperature.

In general, Figure 12 shows a good agreement between the 3D-CFD model and the THMP platform in
both average and maximum winding temperatures. Nevertheless, it is possible to observe higher
deviations between both numerical approaches in the upstream disc of each pass. In the bottom part of
those discs is the first radial channel of the respective pass, which experiences very low velocities, and
in the last pass even a flow inversion, as shown in Figure 13.

9
 normal flow flow inversion

Figure 13. Flow inversion in the first radial channel of the last pass.

This phenomenon, already reported in literature [2] [9], is difficult to capture in THNM models resulting
in much higher temperatures in the 3D-CFD model than in the THMP. According to the energy
conservation principle, when an incompressible fluid increases its velocity, its static pressure decreases.
This phenomenon, named as Venturi Effect, is happening when the oil flows through the axial channel
that connects two consecutive passes. In this region the oil velocity increases and consequently the first
radial channel of the following pass experiences a pressure reduction, that in some cases might cause a
flow inversion (at least numerically).

V. Conclusions

This work describes a global and integrated thermal tool for power transformers that extends to other
components of a transformer the same network modelling techniques previously developed and
validated for the windings. Having a global an integrated thermal model enables more informed design
decisions but represents also a significant step towards the development of a thermal Digital Twin for
power transformers. That would be possible by progressively relaxing the boundary conditions needed
to perform calculations and by progressively approximating them to the existing data in each stage,
either design or operation. This model, named here a Thermal Hydraulic Management Platform
(THMP), has been successfully compared with measurements obtained from the temperature rise test of
a commercial 40 MVA ODAF core-type three phase transformer. The THMP platform proved to be able
to predict the thermal-hydraulic behaviour of the transformer with confidence – the estimated total oil
flow rate deviation is lower than 6 % and both oil and winding temperature deviations are lower than 3
ºC.
In this moment, the platform is still under development and further validations are expected using a
dedicated experimental setup.

Acknowledgements

This work has been co-funded under the European Framework P2020 incentive program to the
Portuguese Industry (Project POCI-01-0247-FEDER-008797). The project acronym is SmarTHER
CORE Transformers.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

[1] Transformer Thermal Modelling, CIGRé Working Group A2.38, 2016.

[2] H. M. R. Campelo, M. A. Quintela, F. Torriano, P. Labbé and P. Picher, "Numerical thermofluid
analysis of a power transformer disc-type winding," in IEEE Electrical Insulation Conference,
Montreal, Canada, 2016.

10
[3] F. Torriano, H. Campelo, P. Labbé, M. Quintela and P. Picher, "Experimental and numerical
thermofluid study of a disc-type transformer winding scale model," in International Conference
on Electrical Machines (ICEM), Lausanne, Switzerland, 2016.
[4] H. Campelo, FluSHELL – A Tool for Thermal Modelling and Simulation of Windings for Large
Shell-Type Power Transformers, Springer International Publishing, 2018.
[5] H. M. R. Campelo, L. F. Braña and X. Lopez-Fernandez, "Thermal Hydraulic Network Modelling
Performance in Real Core Type Transformers," in International Conference on Electrical
Machines (ICEM), Berlin, Germany, 2014.
[6] Weinlader, "Prediction of the oil flow distribution in oil-immersed transformer windings by
network modelling and computational fluid dynamics," IET Electric Power Applications, vol. 6
(2), p. 82–90, 2012.
[7] John D. Anderson, Jr., Computational Fluid Dynamics, McGraw-Hill, Inc., 1995.
[8] M. Quintela, H. Campelo, F. Torriano, P. Labbé and P. Picher, "Assumptions and Numerical
Parameters Influencing the Accuracy of Thermal Models for Core-Type Power Transformer
Windings," in 4th International Colloquium (CIGRé), Pula, Croatia, 2017.
[9] A. Weinläder and S. Tenbohlen, "Thermal-hydraulic investigation of transformer windings by
CFD-Modelling and measurements," in Proceedings of the ISH, South Africa, 2009.

11