RTD as the Valuable Tool in Partial Discharge Measurements

on Rotating Machines
Z. Berler, I. Blokhintsev, A. Golubev, G. Paoletti, A. Romashkov
Cutler Hammer Predictive Diagnostics Division
Abstract: This paper presents the authors’ practical experience
in the on-line measurement of partial discharges in medium
voltage motor and generator stator windings using the RTD as a
partial discharge detector. Results of off-line calibration on
several machines are also presented.
Introduction
On-line measurement of partial discharges (PD) has proved to be an
effective tool in evaluating the condition of stator insulation in high
and medium voltage electric motors and generators [l]. This method
is widely used in addition to the traditional off-line insulation tests
performed during scheduled outages.
Most of PD technologies available now on the market for on-line
measurements function within the radio-frequency band of PD
signals. Such technologies have the common problem resulting from
very rapid attenuation of the high frequency signal as it travels
through the winding. Therefore, sensors commonly installed at
winding terminals have a limited zone of sensitivity and provide
valuable information for that zone only [4]. The evident solution to
this problem is the use of PD sensors imbedded into the winding to
get information on the winding itself. Some of the PD technology
vendors suggest installing specially designed sensors into a winding.
But this approach is relatively expensive and requires an extensive
machine outage and invasion into the winding assembly.
Alternatively, most of the HV machines already have RTD detectors
embedded into the winding by the manufacturer and these detectors
can be used for partial discharge measurements [2,4]. Cutler-
Hammer has over two years of experience using RTDs as PD
detectors. The special PD transducer (RFVS) was designed for
connection to the RTD wire at the RTD terminal block located on
the frame of the motor or generator. The transducer does not disturb
temperature measurements and only passes high frequency PD
signals to the PD instrument. Over 300 machines, primarily HV
Why do We Need RTD as PD Detector?
The traditional approach for PD detection in rotating machines uses
sensors installed near machine line terminals. What is the value of
data obtained from such sensors and what additional information is
required to reliably assess winding insulation condition? Based on
our experience, PD sensors located near machine line terminals
provide valuable information for line terminals and, possibly, for a
ring bus, but not for the winding.
The example below with data obtained on-line from a 37,00OkVA,
13.8kV generator confirms this statement. The generator has an
80pF coupling capacitor installed on each line terminal and also 12
RTDs evenly distributed around the circumference of the stator core.
Six RTDs are placed on the exciter and six on the turbine ends of
the machine. Figure 1 presents three sets of oscillograms taken from
80 pF coupling capacitor (Plot # I ) and from RTD#I (Plot #2) and
RTD#7 (Plot #3). All of them are on the same phase A. RTDs are
also located in the same slot on the exciter and turbine ends
respectively. The oscilloscope was triggered from the PD pulse
originating near the line terminals on phase A and also from the
pulse originating near each of the two RTDs. One can see that the
coupling capacitor provides no response to the PD originating in the
winding on either side of the generator. The opposite is true as well.
The attenuation of PD signal along the slot is also very high and
exceeds 10 times. Therefore, it is necessary to install additional
sensors into a winding or to use RTDs to get information about the
winding condition.
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
.. .. .. ..

r v
motors, were tested during the past two years with good results.
RTDs were used for both the initial survey/evaluation and for on-
Triggeringfrom line terminal PD.
going periodic measurements and data trending.

RTDs are currently very effective in trending of machine PD activity

when used with an analyzer that can effectively reject noise and . . . . . .
.. .. ... ... .. .. . .
. . . .
process PD data. With sensor calibration the use of RTDs can be ............................................
. .. . ... ... .. ..
further applied to allow comparisons between different machines. . . . .
2 . . : . . . .
The issue of sensor calibration requires further evaluation to help
advance the technology and use of RTDs in determining the
machine’s insulation condition. Several machines have been
calibrated, but more field data is necessary for the establishment of
good quantitative data. This paper proposes a calibration procedure
and presents the results of off-line calibration on several machines.
The problems and the vision of future improvements are also
discussed. Figure 1. PD pulse attenuation in a winding

205

Authorized licensed use limited to: Chalmers University of Technology. Downloaded on November 19, 2008 at 06:36 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 Why do We Need Calibration?
The real need to calibrate or normalize a PD measuring circuit on a
rotating machine exists today. As the science of Partial Discharge
measurement was making its first steps, it was agreed that
calibration on rotating machine is a very difficult procedure.
Therefore, it was decided to utilize the Partial Discharge Magnitude
parameter measured in millivolts or Volts [I]. Based on that, the
only valid procedure of using PD data is through relative
comparison of PD data collected using the same vendor’s
technology over time on the same machine or between similar
machines. This situation was bearable while the number of PD
technology users was relatively small and most of sensors’
installation, data collection and interpretation were provided by a
qualified expert.
Now the situation is different. As PD technology is maturing, real-
life cases reveal the need for a standardized PD measuring circuit
calibration procedure. For instance, paper [3] reported a 19,000HP
motor failure just because the 80pF couplers were installed about
4m away from the motor line terminals. That caused signal
attenuation by a factor of 5 and resulted in misinterpretation of the
PD data. As a result the authors of [3] have now normalized all their
PD sensors with pulse generator and oscilloscope and are now using
normalized data for relative comparison between monitored motors.
The necessity of calibration is also important when different sensors
are used for partial discharge measurements on the same machine.
These sensors are of different design and must be normalized to the
same scale. Furthermore, RTDs were not especially designed for
high frequency application. Therefore, one can find a quite different
response of a RTD to the same discharge on machines of different
designs. Another issue that further promotes the need for sensor
normalization, or calibration, is the increasing flow of practical data
collected by different vendors. For instance, the author of [ 5 ]
reported the analysis of over 13,000 test samples. This data is not
very useful for other users since normalization to conventional
measurement units was not done. The above clearly indicates the
need to establish a field calibration procedure to allow for the future
advancement of the benefits of the varying PD technologies
available today.
Calibration Procedure and Units
The approach described below is offered as a possible and useful
solution to the development of an acceptable field calibration
procedure for various PD sensors.
It is well known that the partial discharge transient wave, which is
detected by a PD sensor, experiences very high attenuation and
shape modification while travelling through the stator winding. This
causes a difference in the response of a sensor to a signal originating
in different points in the winding and therefore, becomes the main
problem complicating sensor calibration. The ideal solution is in
calibration of every sensor to all possible PD locations. This
approach is impractical due to the extreme complexity and unknown
PD source location during on-line testing. Two terms are proposed
to establish a uniform calibration standard.
Sensitivity to PD at Sensor Location (Sensitivity) - we calibrate a
sensor by injecting a known charge close to a sensor and
determining -its sensitivity in terms of nCNolt. Such sensitivity
206
Authorized licensed use limited to: Chalmers University of Technology. Downloaded on November 19, 2008 at 06:36 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
applies primarily for partial discharges originating close to a sensor.
Signal attenuation is not taken into consideration in this factor. On
the other hand, attenuation is a very important factor for PD signals
distant to a sensor. Therefore, if sensitivity defined as it is described
above is used, data obtained on-line from a sensor in terms of nano-
Coulombs presents the lower limit estimation of an apparent charge
for discharges originating close to a sensor. In other words, a
,discharge value can be greater for PD near the sensor, but it can not
be less. In spite of the approximate character of this approach, it is
still more accurate than millivolts alone. It creates the opportunity to
compare data taken from different sensors, taken from different
machines and even for machines of different rated voltages. All of
the above is true, to the same extent of approximation, for all
quantities which can be derived from “raw” PD data. These
quantities could be PD power or PD current and so on.
The question left without an answer is the applicability of such
approximation or, in other words where is the limit, beyond which a
comparison looses any practical sense? The answer to this question
is in the term described below and called the “Zone of Sensor
Sensitivity”.
Zone of Sensor Sensitivity - this term is more qualitative than
quantitative. It limits the boundaries of a spatial zone that can be
assessed using a particular sensor. We use 20dB attenuation of a
signal as the criterion to determine the border of the Zone of Sensor
Sensitivily. One can not evaluate PD data reliably beyond that zone
of a particular sensor. From the example given above, we can
evaluate the line terminal insulation condition based on the 80 pF
capacitor readings, but we can not seriously discuss the winding
condition due to the inability of the line terminal PD sensors to
detect winding related PD signals. Any conclusions beyond the
Zone of Sensor Sensitivity would be just a guess based on previous
experience on similar machines with similar operating conditions,
but not on the real data. The knowledge obtained based on the Zone
of Sensor Sensitivity, for various PD sensor technologies, allows for
better planning concerning the number and location of sensors for a
particular application and provides a check on the reliability of the
information obtained. The Zone of Sensor Sensitiviw can be
determined during off-line calibration.
We calibrate the PD measuring circuit in terms of apparent charge
using the procedure similar to that described in ASTM D1868 or
IEC 270 Standards. Therefore, we inject a known charge through a
differentiating (dosing) capacitor into a known point and record the
response of all sensors in Volts. Consequently, sensitivity of a
sensor in terms of nano-Coulomb per Volt for a particular injection
point can be calculated. Zone of Sensor Sensitivity can also be
determined.
Figure 2 presents the example of calibrating circuit for a radio
frequency current transformer placed on the surge capacitor-
grounding conductor on a motor. The same circuit is used to
calibrate any type of PD sensor. Aluminum foil is wrapped around
the accessible part of the winding or the bus bar near the calibrated
sensor. Foil capacitance to HV conductor is commonly in the order
of several hundreds to one thousand of pico-Farads. This exceeds
the capacitance of the dosing capacitor by about 10 times. This
capacitance is connected in series with the dosing capacitor. As a
consequence, the dosing capacitor limits the injected charge.
Therefore, an injected charge can be calculated as the product of
pulse magnitude and dosing capacitance. A small RFCT is
additionally inserted into the charge injecting circuit and measures
injected current. This is an additional method to obtain an injected
charge. An injected charge is calculated as the area under the
oscillogram of the injected current. The first peak of the oscillogram
is used for injected charge calculation. In all cases, we have had
within 20% agreement between injected charges measured in both
ways. This proves that either of the two methods can be used.

Response from .all available sensors is measured for every point of

pulse injection. Therefore, cross-coupling coefficients between
different sensors can additionally be determined while obtaining the
sensitivity of any particular sensor. In order to detect the Zone of
Sensor Sensitivity, a pulse is injected into different points distant
from a calibrated sensor and a distance resulting in 20dB attenuation
is determined. Figures 3 a and b show photographs of the in-field
calibration on a 800MW 2-pole generator.
Figure 3b. Pulse Injection into Line Terminals Area.

SwdInteriace

Pulse Generator
I Some Calibration Results
The results of calibration on small generator and two HV motors are
presented below.

12.5 MW, 13.8 kV Generator

This 42-slot generator is equipped with 12 RTDs distributed evenly
foil as posgble around the circumference of the stator core. Two RTDs are placed in
lnsulahon >
a slot, one on the exciter and another on the turbine end. RTDs 1-6
are placed on the exciter end and RTDs 7-12 are place on the
turbine one. Therefore, 6 slots are equipped with a RTD. The
distance between the two nearest slots containing a RTD is 6 slots.
Fourteen signals were recorded simultaneously for every injection
point
Figure 2. Calibration Circuit. 12 RTDs were connected to the instrument through our
specially designed RFVS sensors and PD analyzer’s signal
conditioning module;
T1 line terminal was connected to the instrument through
I,OOOpF, 20kV coupling capacitor sensor and PD analyzer’s
signal conditioning module;
RFCT measuring injected current was loaded with 50 Ohms at
the oscilloscope end.

Figure 4 shows the RTD response in terms of Volts per nano-

Coulomb for pulse injection into four different points. Three of them
are related to slots containing RTDs and one to the Slot 22, which is
between RTD9 and RTDlO placed in the Slots 18 and 25
respectively. All three RTDs showed approximately the same
sensitivity. The response drops by about 10 times if the pulse is
injected 3 slots away from the RTD. The attenuation of a signal
along a slot is about 5 times.

Figure 5 presents the coupling capacitor response to a PD injection

into different slots on both exciter and turbine ends. The response
Figure 3a. Pulse Injection into the Endwinding Area. drops very rapidly while moving the injection point away from the
line Slot 18. At the same time, this sensor is insensitive to any pulse
injected at the turbine end.

207

Authorized licensed use limited to: Chalmers University of Technology. Downloaded on November 19, 2008 at 06:36 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 The effect of signal attenuation from the RTD to the RTD terminals
0.12 is most significant for RTD wires protected by a spiral steel shield.
0.1
Sensitivity for such RTDs is commonly in the range from 0.015 to
0.02 Volt per nano-Coulomb.
0.08

0.08 The above results of RTD calibration confirm that RTDs can be
0.04
psed as PD detectors in PD technologies based on high frequency
pulse recording.
0.m

0 The difference in sensitivity between different machines is high.

RlDl RlDZ RlD3 RlCd RT[M RSDB KID7 RTIxl RlD9 m 1 0 RlD11 KID12 Therefore, a calibration is required for quantitative comparison
Sensor Name
___ __ -
- .- .____ between different machines or between sensors of different design.
-SI18 RTDIO-Tr -ei-SlZ2-Tr -SUS RTDs_Tr ---SI32 RToa-Tr
(Relative comparison over time or between machines of the same
Figure 4. RTD Response to Injected Pulse. design is not a problem without any calibration.) Several examples
of PD tests using RTDs presented below also confirm that RTDs are

25 -
Coupling CapacitorResponseto Injected Charge
1 a very valuable tool in PD technology.

Exciter End Turbine End

Tl bne SI18 5120 SI25 SI29 SI32
Injection Point
igure 5. Coupling Capacitor Response to Injected Pulse.
7550 HP 13.2 kVSynchronous Motor
The motor has 72 slots and is equipped with 12 RTDs placed at the
ring bus side of a slot. RTDs are distributed evenly along the
winding, every six slots. The sensitivity of different RTDs varies
from O.OSV/nC to 0.07VlnC with an average value of 0.06VlnC.
RTDs located at a greater distance from the RTD terminals showed
less sensitivity. Therefore, a RTD wire routing can be the reason of
the observed difference. The signal attenuation from the opposite
end was very stable for all RTDs and varies from 4.5 to 5.3 times.
Off-line Test
This off-line test was performed on a 12.5MW, 13.8 kV generator
described above. Test voltage of 8 kV (phase to ground rated
voltage) was applied to one phase at a time. The other two phases
were grounded. PD data was collected in the form of traditional
phase-resolved PD distribution with phase resolution of 2 degrees
and magnitude resolution of 0.5dB by Cutler-Hammer “Twins” PD
SI18 sm SI25 SI32
analyzer [6]. The sensitivities obtained from the calibration for
RTD’s and 1,000pF coupling capacitor were used when processing
PD data. The flat projection of the phase-resolved PD distribution
(PRPDD) on the phase-magnitude plane (top view) obtained during
phase B test is presented on Figure 6. Figure 7 shows integral
quantities calculated for data taken from all of the PD sensors in
three subsequent tests. In spite of significant difference in signal
inagnitude (in terms of millivolt) obtained from sensors of different
type (Fig. 6), one can see the reasonable scatter in integral quantities
calculated from the coupling capacitor and RTD data using the
sensitivity of the sensor.
RTDP RTD5 RTD8 RTD11
m-

8000 HP 13.2 kvfnduction Motor

This 4 pole motor has 96 slots and is equipped with 12 RTDs. Two
RTDs are located in the same slot approximately in the center of the
core. Six slots in total are equipped with RTDs. Wires from both
RTDs placed in the same slot come out of the slot in the opposite I”

directions. This motor has a large diameter and relatively short core
of about 1.5 m. In spite of the short core and approximately centrally
located RTD, they show 6 - 7 times better response to pulses
injected from the side of the RTD wires. Significant influence of
RTD wires placed in a slot can be assumed. A wire works as a RF
antenna as well and therefore the effective length of antenna is &
greater for a pulse injected from a RTD wire side of the core. The mv
motor also showed moderate scatter in RTD sensitivity for different Figure 6. Phase B PD data.
RTDs. It varies from 0.2 to 0.28 Volt per nano-Coulomb, which is
about +_I5 - 20%. RTDs located closer to the RTD terminals at the
motor showed higher sensitivity. Higher signal attenuation as a
result of longer wires is the most probable reason for the observed
scatter.

208

Authorized licensed use limited to: Chalmers University of Technology. Downloaded on November 19, 2008 at 06:36 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 Figure 9. Maximum Apparent Charge.

Figure 7. Charts show PD Intensity, Maximum Apparent
Charge and Pulse Repetition Rate Respectively.
(All Calculated from PD data above 0.1 nC.)
On-line Test
This on-line test was performed on a 7500 HP 13.8 kV motor. The
motor is equipped with three permanent radio-frequency current
transformers (RFCT) placed on the surge capacitor grounding
conductor in the motor terminal box and with 6 RTDs embedded
into the winding. RTD 1 & 4, RTD 2 & 5 and RTD 3 & 6 are
installed on the phases A, B and C respectively. RFVS sensors were
used to utilize temporal connection to RTD terminals in the RTD
connection box on the motor frame.
The flat projection of PRPDD from all available sensors is presented
on Figure 8, and maximum apparent charge is on Figure 9. It is very
important to mention that data presented for each sensor is unique
for a particular sensor. Any possible crosscoupling from sensor to
sensor was rejected by the “Twins” analyzer. As one can see, both
magnitudes from RFCT and RTDs are in approximately the same
magnitude range and C-phase showed higher PD activity at line
terminals as well as inside the winding.
-
ma- CC-A ma- cc-B ,-cc-c
w D.. D..
I Sensitivity” is suggested to perform sensor calibration in terms
’!
Conclusions
1. Attenuation of high frequency signals in rotating machine
winding is the main factor complicating PD measurements on
such equipment. Sensors commonly placed near machine line
terminals are insensitive, as a rule, to distant PD originated in
machine winding. Additional sensors placed in winding are
required to reliably detect partial discharges. Resistive
Temperature Detectors (RTDs) already placed in a winding by
the machine manufacturer can be used as high frequency
antennas to collect partial discharge pulses from the depth of
the winding. The use of RTDs allows PD data to be obtained
without an outage to install invasive sensors into winding slots.
2. RTDs commonly have good sensitivity to PD originating
nearby. Therefore, if used complimentary to conventional PD
detectors, these provide better information on partial discharges
in the entire stator winding and yield a more reliable winding
insulation assessment.
3. RTDs were not designed for high frequency application.
Therefore, one can find different response to the same
discharge on machines of different designs. Calibration is
required to scale PD data taken from different machines to the
same base.
4. The calibration procedure was designed with the aim to scale
sensors of different design to the same base. Two terms
“Sensitivity to PD at Sensor location” and “Zone of Sensor
of apparent charge.
5. Over two years of practical experience confirms that RTDs can
be used as a very valuable tool for on-line and off-line PD
measurements on a rotating machine (with an adequate PD
analyzer that can process data and efficiently reject all types of
noise). The key advantage is that the use of PD predictive
technologies can be easily implemented with existing RTDs.

References

RTD5 RTD6 1. Draft of the IEEE PI434 “Guide to Measurement of Partial

Discharges in Rotating Machinery, 1998.

,:“ 2. K. Itoh, Y. Kaneda, S. Kitamura et al. “New Noise Rejection

Technique on Pulse-by-Pulse Basis for On-Line Partial
Discharge Measurements of Turbine Generators”, IEEE PES
Paper # 96WM 154-5-EC
mV

Figure 8. Phase-Resolved PD data.

209

Authorized licensed use limited to: Chalmers University of Technology. Downloaded on November 19, 2008 at 06:36 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 3. Osman M. Nassar, Thani S. AI-Anizi. “Saudi Aramoco
experience with partial discharge on-line motor monitoring
equipment”, IRIS Rotating Machine Technical Conference,
March 10-13, 1998, Dallas, TX USA.

4. I. Blokhintsev, M. Golovkov, A. Golubev, C. Kane “Field

Experiences on the Measurement of Partial Discharges on
Rotating Equipment”, IEEE PES’98, February 1-5, Tampa, FL

5. V. Warren “On-Line Partial Discharge Monitoring: Where do

We Stand and What Next?” EPRI Utility Generator and
Predictive Maintenance & Refurbishment Conference,
December 1-3, 1998, Phoenix, Arizona.

6. Z. Berler, A. Golubev, A. Romashkov, 1. Blokhintsev “A New

Method of Partial Discharge Measurements”, CEIDP-98
Conference, Atlanta, GA, October 25-28, 1998.

210

Authorized licensed use limited to: Chalmers University of Technology. Downloaded on November 19, 2008 at 06:36 from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.