Sie sind auf Seite 1von 5

2008 International Conference on Condition Monitoring and Diagnosis, Beijing, China, April 21-24, 2008

Fault Gas Generation in Ester based


Transformer Fluids and Dissolved Gas Analysis
(DGA)
Imadullah Khan1, Zhongdong Wang*1, Jie Dai1, Ian Cotton1 and Susan Northcote2
1

School of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, University of Manchester, M60 1QD, UK


2
TJ/H2b Analytical Services Ltd., Chester, CH1 6ES, UK
*E-mail: zhongdong.wang@manchester.ac.uk

Abstract--Environmental concern, safety and sustainability of


oil supply are the driving forces behind research into alternative
dielectric fluids to mineral oil. Natural and synthetic esters, as
the alternative fluids, need to be assessed under thermal and
electrical fault conditions, and their performance and likely
impact on the established diagnostic techniques need to be
identified. In this respect, dissolved gas analysis (DGA) and
online DGA monitoring play a vital role for mineral oil filled
transformers, and they are the techniques examined in this
paper. Tests were designed to produce electric faults in ester
fluids in a sealed vessel. Both the headspace gas and dissolved gas
in oil results were used to calculate the generated fault gas
amount. Although DGA readings were lower than mineral oil,
Envirotemp FR3 generated significant amount of free gases,
allowing easy detection of a fault by use of a Buchholz alarm or
similar. Midel 7131 was the most stable fluid in terms of gas
generation during these tests. With improved fluid circulation,
the response time of HYDRAN 201R was identified to be the
same as with esters as with mineral oil.
Index Terms--Condition Monitoring, DGA, Esters based
Fluids, Electrical Faults and Power Transformers.

I. INTRODUCTION

n recent years there has been an increase in the use of


environmental-friendly fluids such as synthetic esters and
natural esters in place of mineral oil. Ester fluids are readily
biodegradable according to the OECD 301 series of tests [1].
The use of esters has been particularly prevalent in
transformers at distribution voltage level [2], although their
use has started to extend to transmission voltage level [3].
Experience has shown that most of the internal faults in a
transformer can be detected through oil analysis [4-5]. Under
electrical and thermal stresses, a variety of gases, combustible
and non-combustible, are generated in transformers as a result
of dielectric fluid degradation. These generated gases dissolve
in the dielectric fluid and DGA is an effective and reliable tool
to detect incipient faults in oil immersed transformers [4-7].
Among the total of nine dissolved gases usually measured, six
gases are combustible. Of the six combustible gases, four are
The authors wish to thank AREVA T&D, EdF Energy, M&I Materials,
National Grid, Scottish Power, TJ|H2b analytical services and United Utilities
for their financial and technical support to form the research consortium on
Alternative fluids for large power transformers at The University of
Manchester. The authors are grateful to the help given by Mr. Michael Webb
from MW Test Equipment for supplying the HYDRAN 201R.

978-1-4244-1622-6/08/$25.00 2008 IEEE

the primary indicator for a specific fault type (such as H2 for


corona type of discharge, C2H2 for arcing, CO for overheating
cellulose and C2H4 for overheating oil [4-7]). These gases are
indicative of developing faults in a transformer and their early
detection can trigger the necessary action in order to prevent
costly failures.
Since the mid-seventies on-line condition monitoring
instruments [8] have been used worldwide by leading electric
power utilities as essential elements in their maintenance
programs to help alerting personnel to developing fault
conditions.
The approach that HYDRAN 201R uses to measuring
dissolved combustible gas is that transformer oil passes
through a membrane where H2, CO, C2H2, C2H4 permeate and
the passed gases then chemically burn in what is essentially
a fuel cell to create an electric current. This current, being
proportional to the gas content of the oil, is then measured to
give readings as a composite value of gases in ppm. The
relative sensitivity of HYDRAN 201R for the key gases are
shown in Table I-1. The dissolved gas in oil measurement
range is from 0-2000 ppm (H2 equivalent), for which the
sensor accuracy and combined gas detection precision is
10% of reading / 25 ppm. The typical response time is 10
minutes for 90 % of step change [8-10].
Table I-1
KEY GASES FOR SPECIFIC FAULT TYPE AND HYDRAN 201R
RELATIVE SENSITIVITY
Key gas

Fault type

H2
CO
C2H2
C2H4

Corona (Low energy discharge)


Overheating of Cellulose
Arcing (High energy discharge)
Overheating of oil

HYDRAN relative
sensitivity
(% of concentration)
100
18 3
82
1.5 0.5

In our previous research [3,5,7], it was concluded that


mineral oil and esters generate the same types of gases for a
specific fault type and DGA fingerprints are similar in esters
to mineral oil. The HYDRAN 201R type was also tested to
verify its performance under an electric fault condition with
ester transformer fluids. However, the previous study was
limited in terms of experimental restrictions such as virtually
no oil circulation oil at room temperature, high viscosity and
different sampling points for the HYDRAN 201R and

measurements taken for standard laboratory DGA [5].


Operational transformers under load, work at a higher than
ambient temperature, which helps to reduce the viscosity of
dielectric fluids, and the HYDRAN 201R is installed at the
passage of oil circulation, caused by either natural or forced
oil flow.
This paper described an improved test facility for verifying
fault gas generation and dissolved gases in ester fluids as
compared with mineral oil. Better oil circulation was
achieved. After an electric fault condition was generated, fault
gas generation was calculated using headspace gas analysis
and dissolved gas in oil. HYDRAN 201R readings were
compared with laboratory DGA results and the HYDRAN
201R response time re-calibrated between esters and mineral
oil.
II.

TEST CONDITIONS

A. Test vessel and HYDRAN 201R connection


Figure II-1 shows the test vessel arrangement. The seal of
the test vessel was improved in comparison to previous tests
by clamping it air- tight with washer rings and bolts. The
HYDRAN 201R sensor was directly connected to one side
of the vessel without any extra piping. For forced oil
circulation, a pump set at 100 RPM was connected between
the bottom oil sampling valve and the headspace gas sampling
valve.

B. Oil pre-processing
New oil was dried at 85C under vacuum overnight in
laboratory under a verified scheme which ensures all the three
oils have a water content less than 10% relative humidity
(RH). It was then pumped via soft tubing through the bottom
valve to fill the test vessel. The valve on the top of the vessel
remained open during the oil filling and once the above
mentioned volume was filled the valve was then turned off. It
is understood that although dried and residual particles left
with the new oil through manufacturing and transporting
procedures will remain and could affect the breakdown
voltages.
C. Electric test setup
A 220V/40kV 8kVA 50Hz test transformer was used as the
voltage source throughout the experiment. Oil gap
breakdowns were achieved by using a point electrode
connected to the HV source leaving an oil gap distance of
10mm above the grounded plate electrode. An over-current
relay set at 3A limit at the low voltage side of the test
transformer was to control the energy during electric faults,
and it operates within a maximum time of 20ms after the
formation of an arc.
Three breakdowns of the 10mm oil gap were made in each
type of fluid with one minute standing time after each
breakdown. The voltage was manually controlled with a rising
speed of about 1 kV/s. The whole process took about 5
minutes per fluid type. The timing of the HYDRAN 201R
response was taken to be from the last breakdown.
Three different types of dielectric fluid were under
investigation in this paper: a mineral oil Nynas Nytro
10GBN, a synthetic ester - Midel 7131 and a natural ester
Envirotemp FR3. The breakdown voltages for the 10 mm
oil gap varied from 34kV to 43kV, Table II-1, and no
significant difference was found among the breakdown
voltage values of the three types of fluid.
Table II-1
BREAKDOWN VOLTAGES AND THEIR AVERAGES (KV) FOR
MINERAL OIL AND ESTERS
Breakdowns

Figure 1: Schematic of the test vessel and HYDRAN mounting position

The volumetric capacity of the test vessel is 1.86 litres, of


which 1.5 litres is occupied by oil to leave a head space of
0.36 litres above the oil surface for the accumulation of the
generated fault gases. When a fault occurs, gases travel
upwards to the headspace to become free gases and at the
same time dissolve themselves into oil. Multiple samples were
obtained simultaneously from different positions including
sampling from the headspace, the external port on
HYDRAN 201R and the bottom valve of the test vessel. The
HYDRAN 201R port can be closed with 5/32 inch Allen
screw [10] and is designed for access by a glass syringe with
three way stop cock.

Mineral oil
(kV)
41.2

MIDEL 7131
(kV)
35.7

FR3
(kV)
33.8

40.4

41.4

35.6

43.0

39.7

37.5

Average

42

39

36

In considering the energy levels during the breakdown, the


breakdown voltage level, the power follow-through current
and the relay operation time, E =

v(t )i(t )dt , would affect


0

the arc energy which dominates the gas generation. It is a


reasonable assumption that comparable energy levels were
produced in different fluids during breakdown tests, unless the
molecule structure, the thermal characteristics of oils has a
significant effect on arcing.
Small gas bubbles were observed after each breakdown,

traveling to the headspace in all cases. Therefore it is


suggested that a significant amount of gases generated during
an electric fault would be maintained in the headspace. As the
equilibrium between the fault gases in the head space and
those dissolved in the oil volume takes some time to reach, the
HYDRAN 201R sensor actually reads the amount of gases
already dissolved in the oil at that time as opposed to the total
amount of gases being generated. Since the mechanical impact
produced by arcing was relatively strong, some of the small
gas bubbles generated from the oil breakdown were pushed 5
to 8 cm sideways from the centre.
D. Sampling
Averages of two samples from the each measurement
position were used for dissolved gas analysis. 2 gas samples
were taken from the headspace at the time immediately after
three breakdowns. At the same time 2 oil samples were taken
from the bottom valve and 2 oil samples from the HYDRAN
201R membrane port. This helps the understanding of the
dissolved gas concentrations at different positions in a
transformer. After some time when the HYDRAN 201R
showed the maximum reading, 2 oil samples were further
received from the membrane port for the laboratory DGA, and
finally after 24 hours, 2 more oil samples were received from
the port. In total, 10 samples were received for a single tested
dielectric fluid, including 8 oil samples and 2 gas samples.
III. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
As mention earlier, the average breakdown voltages for the
10 mm oil gap varied from 36 kV to 42 kV in the point-toplane electrode configuration. Immediately after three
breakdowns, the HYDRAN 201R readings were recorded at
every minute until the maximum reading reached; meanwhile
2 gas samples were received from the top valve via syringes
which were connected air-tight to the valve through soft
tubing. Oil samples were also received from the bottom and
the HYDRAN 201R port. At the end of 24-hour oil
circulation, a HYDRAN 201R reading was also taken.
A. Total generated fault gases
Each DGA result was derived by averaging the results of
the two samples. To calibrate the measurements, dissolved
gases in the untested pre-processed control oil samples were
used as the benchmark for all other tested oil samples, as
shown in Table III-1.
Table III-1
DGA RESULTS (IN PPM) OF CONTROL SAMPLES
Oil
Mineral oil
MIDEL 7131
FR3

H2
0
2
0

CH4
0
0
0

C2H6
0
0
0

C2H4
0
1
0

C2H2
0
0
0

CO
1
5
2

Table III-2 shows the free and dissolved combustible gas


results for various oil samples sampled from different
positions of the test vessel, using Toepler vacuum extraction
and gas chromatographic analysis techniques. The free

combustible gases in the headspace are noted as `HS`, those


from the bottom valve are noted as `B`, and those from the
HYDRAN 201R membrane port are noted as `P`. In all
cases, the gas and oil samples were received at the same time
to see the distribution of the free/dissolved combustible gases
at different positions.
Table III-2
GAS IN HEADSPACE AND OIL DGA (IN PPM) FROM DIFFERENT
POSITIONS
OIL
MINERAL

MIDEL
7131
FR3

SAMPLE
HS
B
P
HS
B
P
HS
B
P

H2
8
24
148
8
3
103
2152
0
139

CH4
2
4
33
9
1
7
105
1
9

C2H6
0
1
7
1
1
2
5
0
1

C2H4
0
8
69
5
1
23
179
2
38

C2H2
0
38
336
15
1
106
723
8
174

CO
4
3
5
18
8
37
533
4
28

As well known by DGA laboratories, measurement with


low concentrations are always treated with cautions. Since the
procedure in terms of sampling, sample storing and measuring
will influence the final readings. In interpretation of the
results, low ppm value e.g. 0 to 100ppm can be regarded as
the same. Figure II-1 shows the volume distribution of the oil
and the headspace within the test vessel. The headspace
volume V1 is 0.36 litres. The volume of oil is split into 4
sections V2, V3, V4 and V5, V2, V3 and V4 are the same,
0.34 litres each and V5, marked as the red dotted line window,
is 0.48 litres. Assuming the same concentration of gases in
V2, V3 and V5 is as P and in V4 is as B in Table III-2, the
total generated gases in the entire system is then calculated
according to the following equations,
Equation A
Total combustible gases (ml) (TCG) = [Bottom oil sample (ppm)* V4 + Port
oil samples (ppm)* (V2+V3+V5) + Headspace sample (ppm)* V1] *1E-6

Equation B,
Total dissolved combustible gases (ml) (TDCG) = [Bottom oil sample (ppm)*
V4 + Port oil samples (ppm)* (V2+V3+V5)] *1E-6

Table III-3 shows the total (free + dissolved) combustible


fault gases (TCG) generated in the samples. It indicates that
MIDEL 7131 generated the least amount of gases, whereas
Envirotemp FR3 generates the most. Most of the gases
generated in Envirotemp FR3 stay in the headspace as the
free gas relative to the dissolved gases. The dissolved gases in
Envirotemp FR3 are also less relative to mineral oil.
In terms of the total dissolved combustible gases (TDCG),
mineral oil has the highest ppm value relative to Envirotemp
FR3 and MIDEL 7131. Particularly notable is that the
primary indicator of arcing C2H2 is doubled in mineral oil in
comparison to Envirotemp FR3 and is tripled in
comparison to MIDEL 7131. The notations for the samples
as shown in Table III-4 are `P-Max` referring to the reading

taken when the HYDRAN 201R had reached the highest


indication and `P-24` for the measurement taken 24 hours.
From Table III-3, it is concluded that Envirotemp FR3
generates more gases but less of them are dissolved into the
fluid as compared to mineral oil.

Table III-5
HYDRAN 201R READINGS (IN PPM) WITH RESPECT TO TIME
Time, t (min)
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20

Table III-3
(A) TOTAL GENERATED COMBUSTIBLE GASES (ML)

H2

Mineral
oil (ml)
0.2

MIDEL
7131 (ml)
0.12

FR3
(ml)
0.9

CH4

0.04

0.012

0.05

C2H6

0.008

0.002

0.003

C2H4

0.08

0.03

0.1

C2H2

0.4

0.13

0.5

CO

0.008

0.052

0.2

TCG

0.74

0.35

1.8

Gas

(B) TOTAL DISSOLVED COMBUSTIBLE GASES (ML)

H2

Mineral oil
(ml)
0.18

MIDEL 7131
(ml)
0.12

FR3
(ml)
0.16

CH4

0.04

0.008

0.01

C2H6

0.008

0.0018

0.001

C2H4

0.08

0.027

0.045

Gas

C2H2

0.4

0.12

0.2

CO

0.007

0.045

0.034

TDCG

0.72

0.33

0.46

FR3

2
15
30
52
70
78
93
110
126
140
152
161
167
176
186
200
215
226

7131
2
2
3
5
10
15
23
30
36
42
47
51
54
57
59
61
63
64

2
2
5
8
15
23
30
37
38
45
61
65
76
90
101
103
108
113

Hydrogen and other combustible gases can diffuse through


the porous membrane and oxidize on a gas permeable
platinum electrode to create an electric current (standard 0-1
mA). This current is then measured and is proportional to the
gas contents of oil as shown below, PPM = 2000 x mA. The
relative sensitivity of the monitor to other gases is shown in
Table I-1.

Table III-4

Expected HYDRAN 201R reading in ppm = 100% H2 + 15% CO + 8% C2H2


+1% C2H4 from the laboratory DGA results

Sample

H2

CH4

C2H6

C2H4

C2H2

CO

148

33

69

336

Mineral oil

PMax
P24

103
52

42
21

9
3

100
32

563
121

4
11

103

23

106

37

MIDEL 7131

PMax
P24

52
29

14
8

3
2

53
23

270
151

56
49

139

38

174

28

PMax
P24

82
0

8
2

2
2

34
9

152
52

25
8

FR3

MIDEL

(The starting time, t=0, is the time immediately after the 3rd breakdown)

DGA IN OIL (IN PPM) SAMPLED AT DIFFERENT TIME


Oil

Mineral

B. Comparison of actual and expected HYDRAN 201R


readings
After receiving the gas and oil samples which usually took
less than 10 minutes, oil circulation immediately started. The
corresponding HYDRAN 201R reading at the circulation
starting time for different oils are highlighted in red and italic
in Table III-5.
Table III-6 shows the actual ppm reading of HYDRAN
201R in comparison to the calculated ppm reading using Table
I-1 and laboratory based DGA results. The expected
HYDRAN 201R reading is calculated as below,

Table III-6
HYDRAN 201R READINGS IN COMPARISON WITH EXPECTED VALUE
CALCULATED FROM LABORATORY BASED DGA RESULTS

Oil
Mineral
MIDEL
7131
FR3

HYDRAN,
ppm
Expected
Actual
Expected
Actual
Expected
Actual

P Max

P 24

176
15
117
5
158
23

150
236
83
71
98
103

64
69
49
41
5
12

The expected and actual ppm values of HYDRAN 201R


for all the oils are generally in conformity as shown in Table
III-6 except that there is discrepancy at the initial stage P
when HYDRAN 201R has a certain delay in response to
dissolved gases in oil.
C. Response time of HYDRAN 201R
Table III-5 and Figure III-1 show the data of HYDRAN
201R reading and the trend in terms of HYDRAN 201R
response time.
Figure III-1 clearly indicates that the response time for
mineral oil and esters are the same, with the only difference at

the magnitude of readings. At 20 minutes time all types of


fluids reach to their maximum readings i.e. the maximum
HYDRAN 201R reading for mineral oil was 226 ppm,
whereas the maximum ppm value for Envirotemp FR3 and
MIDEL 7131 was a half and onefourth in respect to that
for mineral oil. After 20 minutes, the ppm value starts to
decrease from its peak value for all cases of fluid, indicating
that continuous fluid circulation helps to re-distribute the
gases evenly in the fluid and also the equilibrium state
between the fluid and the headspace, as shown in Figure III-2.
250

Mineral oil
MIDEL 7131
FR3
Linear (Mineral oil)
Linear (MIDEL 7131)
Linear (FR3)

200

226

membrane port.
V. ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors particularly appreciate the help given from Ian
James, Alan Darwin, Paul Dyer, Russell Martin, James
ONeil, Paul Jarman, Peter Docherty, Dave Walker, John
Noakes and Tony Byrne for providing invaluable expertise
and technical guidance towards the project.
VI. REFERENCES
[1]
[2]

ppm

150
113

[3]

100

64

50

0
0

9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

[4]
[5]

minutes

Figure 2 : HYDRAN 201R readings with time until the maximum


reading

[6]
250
Mineral oil

[7]

MIDEL 7131

200

FR3

[8]
[9]

ppm

150

100

[10]

50

0
0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

Time (min)

Figure 3: Response of HYDRAN 201R with time for 24 hours

IV. CONCLUSIONS
A comparative study on how DGA and HYDRAN 201R
online monitoring techniques can be used with esters and
mineral oil when subjected to an electric fault has been
presented.
When compared to mineral oil, Envirotemp FR3
generates significantly higher amounts of fault gases but less
readily absorbs these gases into the fluid as dissolved gases.
MIDEL 7131 generates the lowest amount of fault gases.
The response time of HYDRAN 201R to dissolved gases
in mineral oil and esters are the same when a good oil
circulation is provided, although the amount of the reading is
different owing to the relative amounts of gas generated
during the fault.
The HYDRAN 201R reading is in agreement with the
DGA results obtained by oil sampling from HYDRAN 201R

OECD-301, "OECD guideline for testing of chemicals," Adopted by the


Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development Council,
1992.
K. Rapp and P. Stenborg, "Field analysis of Envirotemp FR3 fluid in
sealed versus free-breathing transformers," Dielectric fluids engineering
report CP0414, Cooper Power Systems, 2004.
D. Martin, I.U. Khan, J. Dai, and Z.D. Wang, "An overview of the
suitability of vegetable oil dielectrics for use in large power
transformers," the 5th Annual Euro TechCon Chester, United Kingdom,
2006.
IEEE-Std-C57.104-1991, "IEEE guide for the interpretation of gases
generated in oil-immersed transformers," Institute of Electrical and
Electronic Engineer, 1992.
J. Dai, I.U. Khan, Z.D. Wang, and I. Cotton, "Comparison of HYDRAN
and laboratory DGA results for electrical faults in ester transformer
fluids," in Annual Report IEEE Conference on Electrical Insulation and
Dielectric Phenomena (CEIDP), VANCOUVER BC, CANADA, 2007, pp.
731-734.
IEC60599, "Mineral oil-impregnated electrical equipment in serviceGuide to the interpretation of dissolved and free gases analysis," 1999.
I. U. Khan, Z. Wang, I. Cotton, and S. Northcote, "Dissolved gas
analysis of alternative fluids for power transformers," Electrical
Insulation Magazine, IEEE, vol. 23, pp. 5-14, 2007.
T. Cargol, "An Overview of online oil monitoring technologies" Fourth
Annual Weidmann - ACTI Technical Conference, San Antonio, 2005.
Belanger and et al, "Apparatus for detecting and measuring the
Hydrogen content in a liquid substance," United States Patent
4,271,474, United States Patent and Trademark Office, Washington DC,
USA, 1981.
General Electric Company, "GE energy management - HYDRAN 201R
model i online monitoring of transformer key-fault gases," GE Syprotec
Inc - www.gepower.com.

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen