Power Transformer Temperature Evaluation for Overloading Conditions

Jos A. Jardini, Fe/low IEEE, Luiz C. Magrini, Member IEEE Jos L. P. Brittes, Member IEEE, Marco A. Bini, Member IEEE

Abtract - The calculation methodologies of the B. Winding Hottest Spot Rise transformers hottest spot and top oil temperatures are evaluated here to thereafter compare them to the values obtaining during a transformer acceptance factory test. The referred tests were conducted using an ONAF, 30/40 MVA, 138/13.8 kV transformer, in which sensors with fiber optics cables, to record directly the internal parameters, were installed. In a first series of test, transformer loading correspondent to 100%, 70% and 116.5% of rated power were used. The tests were completed by applying values of a Where: H is the hottest-spot rise over top oil daily load profile with several hourly power levels. temperature Additionally in two of the hourly periods, high m is an empirical exponent temporary loadings one of 160% during 30 minutes W is the winding time constant and another of 170% during 15 minutes were applied. loading, Values of m, n to be used are indicated in the standards, however, as it is known, the use of single values for each is not correct to calculate all the I. INTRODUCTION loading conditions Transformer parameters R, n, m, TO and W are The IEEE/ANSI, and IEC standards [1], [2] present determined in its factory tests. Particularly, [3] methodologies for the intemal temperature calculation recommends testing the transformers for at least 3 in transformers. Such formulas, as found in [1], are: levels of power, while determining the referred parameters. Also, an eventual test with a daily load A. Top Ou Temperature Rise profile, is recommended to be carried out. For transformers already in operation, in which factory tests were not carried on, [4] recommends a methodology to evaluate the top oil temperature. Likewise, [1] in its Appendix G, suggests an alternative methodology to calculate the transformer internal temperatures based upon its physical characteristics. Aim at deferring investments; utilities at present have studied several methodologies that may enable loading of transformers above nameplate rated values, especially for short duration cases. Where: TO is the top oil rise over ambient This is the case of CPFL (Companhia Paulista de temperature Fora e Luz) utility in Brazil, which deals with a total Load of 5000 MW. i = initial, U = ultimate, R = rated To analyze the possibility of applying high K is the ratio of actual load to rated load overloading in the transformers, CPFL bought, in R is the ratio load loss at rated load to no load 2001, a transfonner with embedded temperature loss Index Terms - Power temperature, overloading transformer

n is the empirical exponent TO is the oil time constant t is the time f is a function of: TO,U, TO,i [1] ___________________________________________ _________ Jos A. Jardini and Luiz C. Magrini are with So Paulo University, So Paulo, Brazil Jos L. P. Brittes and Marco A. Bini are with CPFL Companhia Paulista de Fora e Luz, Campinas, Brazil

sensors on which pertinent test to determine its parameters, were carried on. The results obtained in such an evaluation will be discussed in this paper. II. TESTS PERFORMED During the construction of the above mentioned 138/13.8 kV, 30/40 MVA, ONAN/ONAF type transformer a number of 8 embedded temperature sensors with fiber optics cables, were installed, aside to the top oil temperature, thermal image, radiator input and output sensors. The additional sensors location in the transformer, can be seen in Fig. 1. III. RESULTS

A.Losses Evaluation (item II c above) The values recorded, were: No load losses = 17.8 kW Rated load losses = 244.9 kW R = 13.72 B. Ultimate Temperature (item II a) Fig. 1 - Temperature sensors Iocation The sensors are: 1-LV (low voltage) top winding, second layer; 2-LV top oil duct; 3-LV top winding, third layer; 4-LV bottom oil; 5-HV (high voltage) top winding; 6-HV top winding; 7- HV top oil duct; 8- HV bottom oil The following tests were carried on: II a) (ONAF) 100%, 70%, 116.5% (of rated load, 40MVA), II b) (ONAF) load profile values varying from 30% to 100% on hourly basis. In the 11th step the load was raised to 160% for 30 mm, and in the 21st step to 170% for 15 mm (see Fig. 2) II c) Load losses at rated load and no load losses evaluation Table 1 shows the ultimate temperature rises above ambient for the above (II a) test. DLV Low voltage winding 70 26.5 37.5 100 41.4 57.0 116.5 50.9 69.4 Table 1 - Ultimate Temperature Rise above ambient ( C) Note: TO = 2 hours, at 100% load W = 10 mm (hot resistance measurement) C. Load Profile (item II b) During this test, each loading step was applied for a 1 hour period hence the time for temperature stabilization was not enough. Consequently, in order to obtain ultimate values of temperature rise an exponential temperature curve was fitted to values recorded, and extrapolated. Therefore, an error may have been appeared during this process. Results corresponding to this test are shown in Fig. 2. Load % DTO Top oil

Fig. 2 - Load profile test result

The ultimate values obtained from tests II a and II b, can be seen in Fig. 3 and 4, next:

Figure 5 - lhe 100% loading test results Figure 3 - Ultimate top oil temperature rise (DTO) From Fig. 5, it can be verified that: the top oil duct temperature (DOD) follows the winding temperature above ambient (see: DLV - DOD); the oil duct minus the top oil temperature, is initially high but converging latter to a temperature of 4C (see: DOD - DTO). Such results in Fig. 5 duly converted into equations are intended to be used in an real time system for evaluating, the transformer temperatures thus its adequacy for temporary overloading. To define a calculation method to be utilized, the following attempt and respective results, have been carried on: Procedure 1: Calculation of the top oil and hottest spot temperatures, as indicated in items I, II, equations (6), (2), (3), (7), and (5) the latter modified in which H = H,U. The errors pertaining to this evaluation Figure 4 - Hottest spot temperature rise (DLV) (measured value minus calculated value) can be seen above ambient, Low Voltage winding. in Fig. 6.

Figure 4 Hottest spot temperatura rise (DLV) Procedure 2: Calculation using the alternative above ambient, Low Voltage winding. method presented in [1]. The errors in this case are shown in Fig. 7. Note: The upper curve has a margin of 5C to the lower. Procedure 3: Calculation of top oil temperature, using the method presented in [4]. lhe errors in this case are The equations for fihied curves in the above shown in Fig. 8. figures are: DTO = 0,00105 p2 + 0,3043 p + 0,0082 (6) DLV = 0,00127 p2 + 0,4429 p + 0,0307 (7) p: loading in percent of 40 MVA The correspondent values of m, n could be evaluated, however, that will not be necessary because equations (5), (6) above can be used in substitution to (1) and (4). IV. ANALYSES OF RESULTS Fig. 5 shows the measured temperature rise above ambient during the 100% loading step Figure 6 - Errors when applying Procedure 1 (measured minus calculated values)

In the Fig. 6 (Procedure 1) as for the top oil temperature, the errors are less than 3C except for cases with high power steps in which errors are less than 8C. Most ofthe errors are negative which shows that the calcuLations may lead to values on safety side. The hottest spot temperature errors are less than 5C, except aiso for high power steps for which the values obtained were less than l5C.

Figure 8 - Top oil temperature errors when applying Procedure 3 In this approach (Fig. 8), the resulting values depend on the adopted values for n and TO. In the above figure, TO = l20min, and with it the less error values are obtained when n = 1. It could also be used another value of n, less than the latter, to obtain a similar result, however the value of TO will need to be increased. For all the analysis conducted (Procedures 1,2,3), high errors appear at the beginning of the power variation. To identify the previous fact, Fig. 9 displays the results for 100% loading case along with the stated calculation Procedures and the measured values.

Figure 7 - Errors when applying Procedure 2 It can be seen in Fig. 7 (Procedure 2) that this methodology presents good results with errors less than 3C and 5C respectively for the top ou and hottest spot; except again for high power steps (5C and 10C).

PC 57.119 Draft Recommended Practice As can be observed, all the approaches [3] considered lead to adequate vatues while for Perforrning temperature Rise Tests on Oil Imrnersed calculating the top oil temperature. In relation to Power Transformers at Loads Beyond Nameplate Rating, IEEE, October 1996 the hottest spot temperature, Procedure 2 presents better results. [4] Swift G, Molinski T. S., Lehn W. A To improve the values obtained in Procedure 1, it Fundamental Approach to Tlransformer would be necessary to add in the equations a Therrnal Modeling - Part I: Theory and Equivalent Circuit, IEEE Trans. On Power function that may represent the correction curve Delivery, vol. 16, April 2001, pp 171-175. shown in Fig. 9. Such a function being: VII. BIOGRAPHIES Jos Antonio Jardini (M 1966, SM 1978, F 1990) was born in So Paulo, Brazil, on March 27th, 1941. He graduated frorn Escola Politcnica da Universidade de So Paulo in 1963 (Electrical Engineering). Fron the same institution he received the MSc, PhD, Associate Professor and Head Professor degrees in 1971, 1973, 1991 and 1999, respectively. For 25 years he worked for Themag Engenharia Ltda., a leading consulting cornpany in Brazil, where he conducted many power systerns studies and participated in major power system projects such as the Itaipu hydro plant. He is currently Head Professor at Escola Politcnica da Universidade de So Paulo, where he teaches power systern analysis and digital automation, and where he leads the GAGTD group, which is

Values corresponding Tc, TO should be determined in a future anaiys is. V. CONCLUSIONS The calculation methodologies of top oil temperatures so far presented, have shown satisfactory results. However, the equations to obtain hottest spot temperatures will need to be improved. This mainly referred to short intervals of high power, which is of our concern, and where the ultimate values are not achieved, so far. The use of Annex G from the IEEE Std C57.911995, provided results close to those measured in the transformers, therefore, it can be used to obtain quite a reliable results. VI. REFERENCES

[1] [2]

IEEE std C57.91-1995 IEEE Guide for Loading Mineral - Oil - Immersed Transformer, 1995. IEC 354 International Standard Loading Guide for Oil Immersed Power Transforrners, 1991-09

responsible for the study and development of autornation systerns in the fields ofgeneration, transrnission and distribution of electricity. He represented Brasil at SC-38 of CIGR and is a Distinguished Lecturer of IAS/IEEE. Luiz Carlos Magrini was bom in So Paulo, Brasil, on May 3th, 1954. He graduated frorn Escola Politcnica da Universidade de So Paulo in 1977 (Electrical Engineering). From the same institution he received the MSc and PhD degrees in 1995 and 1999, respectively. For 17 years he worked for Themag Engenharia Ltda, a leading consulting cornpany in Brasil. He is currently a researcher at Escola Politcnica da Universidade de So Paulo GAGTD group.