SESSION I-1

International Conference on Condition Monitoring & Diagnostic Engineering Management of Power Station / Substation Equipment - 2009
ASSET HEALTH REVIEW FOR A POPULATION OF POWER
TRANSFORMERS

John Lapworth* and Simon Ryder
Doble Powertest Ltd, UK

*jlapworth@doble.com

1 Introduction

Effective management of transmission or distribution network involves a process to ensure
circuit availability by understanding the risks of poor performance. This is an increasingly
important activity for an ageing asset base. Undertaking a regular Asset Health Review of
major plant is a key step in achieving this. This paper will describe the process used in the
UK for a population of around 800 transmission transformers.

The activity itself has been undertaken by Doble Power Test Ltd (DPT), acting as an external
service provider to the asset managers of the transmission utility. The data for the review
comes from various sources within the utility and from other service providers and the
information provided must be immediately accessible to both service provider and utility.

As an engineering activity an asset health review requires a consistent, objective and defined
process, such that any engineers will respond to the evidence similarly, and the client will
understand the outcomes in the same way as assessing engineers. The review starts with
simple assessments based on existing information that will in turn prioritise which units
warrant resource to obtain further investigation to get more complete or up-to-date condition
information. The initial Population Review will then evolve in a series of steps, each
achieving a refining of the analysis of risk. In this way it prioritises resource, giving greater
attention to units perceived to be in poorer condition. At each stage it provides a degree of
refinement in the relative assessment of one unit against its population. The ultimate stage of
refinement is a Condition Assessment of selected individual units which aims to assemble
all condition information available and obtain new information by means of specially
commissioned on-line and off-lines tests. In some cases corrective actions will be
recommended aimed at avoiding unexpected in-service failures, particularly for any critical
points in the network.

The process and methodology to be described for the assessment of a population of
transformers is equally applicable to other types of power station and substation assets, but
the evaluation is tailored to the specific characteristics of the asset type involved.
Transformers are probably the single most important asset in a substation, being the most
expensive item, with very long constructional lead times. Fortunately, transformers are
normally very reliable and durable, but not always and for ever. Unfortunately, when faults
occur these can be difficult to diagnose by traditional means, and can develop
catastrophically, with possibly substantial collateral damage. Also, very little information on
the basic condition of transformers is obtained as a result of routine maintenance work, which
is focussed on accessible components such as the tap-changer, rather than the all important
but inaccessible core and winding assembly. Furthermore, internal inspections are rarely
c/arried out on transformers because of the expense involved in oil handling; in any case they
are often inconclusive. Although the life of a transformer is ultimately limited by the ageing
of the paper insulation and oil in normal service, most transformer failures occur as a result of
damage sustained by unusual events such as lightning strikes, system over-voltages and
SESSION I-1
International Conference on Condition Monitoring & Diagnostic Engineering Management of Power Station / Substation Equipment - 2009
short-circuits. Therefore, for transformers it is important to assess the likelihood of having
sustained such damage, and the probable consequences, and this means that transformers
have to be assessed on an individual basis, using sophisticated condition assessment
techniques.

2 Population Review

The first step in carrying out an Asset Health Review is to create a list of all assets: of each
transformer at each bay in each substation. This list should include functional parameters,
e.g. voltages, MVA, impedance, and other basic nameplate data giving constructional
information on manufacturer, date of manufacture and design parameters. This very basic
information is a good starting point for review and forms the basis for a presentation of the
summary of condition information for the asset manager. Each unit can then be related to
others in the same functional and design groups to assess how they are performing. Any
information held by the utility on manufacturing inspections, design issues and factory testing
can then be linked and accessed through this summary.

Current policy in the UK is to carefully examine all transmission units removed from service
to look for any evidence of design weaknesses, malfunction or general ageing. The scrapping
contract allows for rest periods for engineer access to make assessments and take samples at
appropriate stages. Samples of insulating paper from winding conductors are taken from the
same positions of every unit: from the top, middle and bottom of each winding. These are
tested for ageing (degree of polymerisation - DP) and this allows a relative assessment of
ageing in the population. Additionally, samples would be taken from any other area where
there was obvious sign of overheating. Sampling is accompanied by an investigation of any
evidence of specific malfunctions in key areas- tank, connections, frame, core, windings, tap
changer etc. This information and any other found during in service investigations is
invaluable in building up a family-by-family assessment of strengths and weaknesses. By
itself this provides the first stage of assessment and identification of higher risk units- in
terms of their design group and service life.

As discussed previously, in addition to a family assessment, transformers in particular need to
be assessed on an individual basis for evidence of faults sustained as a result of unusual
system events, as well as for signs of ageing. The most effective means of monitoring the
condition of transformers is by the analysis of routine oil samples taken from the main tank
and any separate tap-changer selector compartments. In the UK, oil samples are taken from
transmission transformers at least annually and are analysed at the laboratory of another
service provider. Apart from emergency samples, DPT reviews all analyses with results
above agreed trigger levels before they are passed to the transmission utility asset manager.
The tests are to identify developing faults from dissolved gases, general malfunctions from
contamination in the oil, oil quality and paper ageing.

The interpretation of dissolved gas analysis (DGA) results to identify developing faults is
well established in standards and guides, invariably based on the ratios of key diagnostic
gases, but the means of discriminating between normal and abnormal results is more
problematic. Most approaches recommended in standards are based on deriving normal or
typical levels for the key diagnostic gases from statistical analyses of DGA databases, but
such an approach is not considered to be particularly effective, the action levels so derived
being indicative more of an unusual rather than an unhealthy condition, and are critically
dependent on the base data used. In any case any assessment technique based on gas levels,
SESSION I-1
International Conference on Condition Monitoring & Diagnostic Engineering Management of Power Station / Substation Equipment - 2009
28/10/95 15/05/96 01/12/96 19/06/97 05/01/98 24/07/98 09/02/99
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
D
G
A

S
c
o
r
e
such as trending, can be compromised by oil treatment. In order to arrive at a more robust
technique, and one providing a quantitative, consistent and objective indication of condition
from DGA results, an innovative DGA scoring system has been developed [1]. The
technique effectively quantifies the significance of gas ratios, while taking into account gas
levels by an enhancement of the percentage combustible gas approach used by IEEE [2].
The technique provides a clear visual discrimination between normal and suspect units, as
illustrated by Figure 1 which shows a review of DGA results from a family of 13 similar
transmission transformers. It is immediately obvious from a cursory examination of the DGA
signatures that transformer #13 appears to be suffering from a localised overheating fault, and
subsequent winding resistance measurements identified faulty tap lead joints. Moreover,
more detailed examination identifies a couple of other members of the family exhibiting a
similar signature, but at a much earlier stage of development. The DGA scoring algorithm
was tuned using DGA data on a variety of UK transformer faults. A score of less than 60 is
designed to be safe and free from developing faults; allowing transformers falling into this
category (the majority) to be screened out of any further consideration. The DGA score can
be used to track the development of a fault, even if de-gassing has been performed in the
interim, as illustrated in Figure 2 which shows the development of a core and frame to tank
circulating current problem leading up to Buchholz alarms.
DGA for Population
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
ATx1 ATx2 ATx3 ATx4 ATx5 ATx6 ATx7 ATx8 ATx9 ATx10 ATx11 ATx12 ATx13
%CO
%H2
%CH4
%C2H4
%C2H6
%C2H2

Figure 1: Total Combustible Gas signatures for a family of transformers













Figure 2: Change in DGA score for a developing fault

SESSION I-1
International Conference on Condition Monitoring & Diagnostic Engineering Management of Power Station / Substation Equipment - 2009
Transformers in a population are reviewed quarterly on the basis of the DGA score: those 30
with the highest scores and those 30 with the highest rate of change are reported for
prioritised further investigation, which may mean reviewing the design group, or a site
investigation.

In the Asset Health Review the overall condition of each transformer is broken down in terms
of three basic aspects (Figure 3), and conventional DGA monitoring provides information on
two of these: dielectric or thermal faults. The third condition aspect included in the overall
assessment is mechanical integrity, but it is only possible to obtain a very approximate
assessment of this from DGA data, e.g. of possible evidence of loose winding clamping from
sparking activity at loose clamping bolts. The reporting format allows problems with
individual units to be linked with any knowledge of design weaknesses. The condition
aspects are scored in a series of levels, each reflecting a differing degree of perceived
reliability, and a logarithmic scoring scheme is used to ensure that a poor score in one aspect
is not lost by good scores in others. The outcome is presented using a Green/Yellow/Red
traffic light scheme for easy assimilation of the main conclusions.

Transformer Condition Summary
Site SGT HV LV MVA T No. Manf Design Year Service Rep Age Rank Overall Dielectric Ageing Mechanical Reports Oil Tap-changer External Comment
SGT3 400 132 240 T5533 PPT P06 1968 36 37 1 180 100 70 10 Evidence of load dependent localised thermal fault, probably involving windings.
SGT2 400 132 240 T5435 AEI A04 1967 36 55 1 151 1 50 100 FRA test indicated suspected tap winding movement on A phase (known generic short-circuit withstand problem with this family). High FFA.
SGT2 275 132 180 T3544 HHE H08 1962 42 47 2a 130 100 30 Suspected thermal fault (known generic problem with this family).
SGT3A 400 275 500 T4175 CAP C03 1965 38 40 1 110 100 10 Serious partial discharge fault in main tank.
SGT1 275 132 120 T2471 FER F08 1958 45 48 1 110 30 70 10 Serious arcing/sparking fault in main tank, from loose clamping screws (known generic problem with this family). Oil in poor condition. Very high FFA.
SGT3 275 132 120 T2843 FER F08 1959 44 50 1 110 30 70 10 Serious arcing/sparking fault in main tank, from loose clamping screws (known generic problem with this family). Oil in poor condition. High FFA
SGT1 275 66 120 T3139 AEI A10 1960 43 55 1 103 100 3 Partial discharge fault, believed to be a result of a foreign object accidentally introduced during maintence.
SGT2 275 132 120 FER F08 100 30 70
SGT1 275 132 120 T2808 FER F08 1958 46 46? 1 90 30 50 10 Serious arcing/sparking fault in main tank, from loose clamping screws (known generic problem with this family). High FFA.
SGT2 275 132 120 T2807 FER F08 1957 46 46? 1 90 30 50 10 Serious arcing/sparking fault in main tank, from loose clamping screws (known generic problem with this family). High FFA.
SGT3 275 132 120 T2521 FER F08 1953 45 55 2c 80 10 70 Historic serious arcing/sparking fault in main tank, from loose clamping screws (known generic problem with this family), now dormant. High FFA.
SGT2 400 132 240 T5581 AEI A04 1967 36 55 2b 80 10 70 High FFA (until last sample). Oil in poor condition.
SGT4A 275 132 150 T2844 FER F07 1959 44 50 2b 110 10 100 Oil in poor condition. Very high FFA.
GRT1 66 22 40 T3227 YET 1958 46 55 2b 71 1 70 High FFA.
GRT2 66 22 40 T3229 YET 1958 46 55 2b 71 1 70 High FFA.
SGT1 400 132 240 T6847 PPT P08 1990 13 55 4 4 1 3 High FFA (1.67) is believed to result from contamination.
SHR2 275 100 R006 AEI A12 c 1966 (not known) 55 2? 71 1 70 Historically very high FFA (fell in two most recent samples).
SGT2 275 132 240 T5423 GEC G14 1967 37 55 1 70 30 30 10 Serious arcing/sparking fault in main tank, from loose clamping screws. High FFA (until last sample).
SGT3 275 132 240 T4974 GEC G14 1965 38 55 1 70 30 30 10 Serious arcing/sparking fault in main tank, from loose clamping screws. High FFA (until last sample).
SGT2A 275 132 120 T2472 FER F08 1959 45 47 1 70 30 30 10 Serious arcing/sparking fault in main tank, from loose clamping screws (known generic problem with this family). Oil in poor condition. Historically high FFA (fell in two most recent samples).
215Y 132 15 R170 55 4 70 70
K1Y 275 97 R167 EEC E19 c 1964 40 55 4 70 70
K2Y 275 97 R166 EEC E19 c 1964 40 55 4 70 70
SGT2A 275 132 120 T3120 HHE H09 1959 45 55 4 70 70 High FFA
SHR1 275 100 R031 EEC E18 c 1970 34 55 4 70 70
SHR2 1969 35 70 70
SGT5A 400 275 900 T5009 EEC E02 1967 36 42 2c 60 30 30 Free gas at high loads (known generic problem with this family).
SGT4 400 132 240 T6424 PPT P07 1974 29 55 2b 60 30 30 Suspected load dependent thermal fault, possibly core/frame circulating current.
SGT4 400 132 240 T6636 FER F04 1980 24 25 2a 60 30 30 Load-dependent localied overheating fault, possibly over-heating core bolts (known generic problem with this family).
QB3SE 400 400 2000 T6967 PPT P12 2000 4 55 2a 60 30 30 Rewound in 2000. Suspected thermal fault.
SGT1 275 132 240 T5829 AEI A07 1968 36 55 2a 60 30 30 Suspected core/frame circulating current. Oil becoming acid, but FFA low.
SHR1 400 200 R126 GEC G10 c 1978 26 55 2? 60 30 30 Suspected localised thermal fault.
SHR1 400 200 R127 GEC G10 c 1978 (not known) 55 2? 60 30 30 Intermittent arcing/sparking fault in main tank.
SHR2 400 200 R116 GEC G10 c 1975 29 55 2? 60 30 30 Intermittent arcing/sparking fault in main tank. Oil in poor condition.
SGT1 275 132 240 T5016 PPT P13 1968 36 55 2a 60 30 30 Historic serious over-heating fault, dormant for some years but now active again.
SGT2 400 132 240 T5887 HHE H05 1971 32 55 2b 60 30 30 Suspected localised thermal fault.
SGT2 400 132 240 T5007 EEC E07 1967 37 55 3 60 10 50 High FFA. Oil in poor condition.
SGT5A 400 275 750 T4671 FER F01 1969 35 55 2b 54 1 50 3 1104 High FFA. Oil in poor condition. Possible winding movement (from condition assessment of sister transformer).
SGT1B 400 132 180 T4072 FER F06 1964 40 55 4 53 3 50 High FFA.
SGT1 275 132 180 T3575 CAP C07 1962 41 55 4 53 3 50
Summary presentation of Transformer Asset Health Review
Figure 3

Sub-components can also be assessed from oil analyses, principally tap-changer selectors and
bushings, as discussed later, and it is also convenient to record in this database any other
condition related information, e.g. the condition of the oil and the physical condition of the
tank and coolers (leaks, paint condition, etc.).

In addition to any information on condition available from routine DGA condition
monitoring, it is valuable to include any evidence from routine site surveys, e.g. infra-red for
overheating, and UHF interference for partial discharge and arcing.

To summarise, in this first stage the basic Asset Health Review database is constructed and
populated with information on condition which is already available, or can easily be obtained
by on-line surveys.

In addition to condition, another level of prioritisation which can be included is the
importance of the unit to the system and this is undertaken by the utility- as an asset
management activity. The aim throughout is to identify some 3% of the population for a
more detailed assessment. Some of the worst 3% will have been assessed recently so it will
be a balance between re-testing or performing a new assessment on a unit where the last
review was not recent.
SESSION I-1
International Conference on Condition Monitoring & Diagnostic Engineering Management of Power Station / Substation Equipment - 2009

3 Condition Assessment of Individual Units

The second stage of a detailed Asset Health Review is to perform inspection and site testing
on individual units to derive additional information, aimed at assessing the condition as
indicated below. Such condition assessments would be prioritised according to the outcome
of the first stage Population Review, but may also be triggered by a number of other
situations, e.g.

! To check the condition after a worrying DGA result or a protection operation
! To assess the condition of recently unused or second-hand spares
! To assess the suitability for significant change in operation/loading
! To demonstrate satisfactory condition to interested third parties

a. External condition
The external inspection is important. It will cover inspection for rusting to the tank, pipe
work, radiators and control cubicles- signs of oil leaks, malfunctioning indicators, defective
wiring, etc. More generally are issues with concrete structures, oil containment together with
assessment of any physical obstacles to replacing bushings or the transformer. Design-
related problems of localised overheating should have been identified from an infra-red scan
carried out during the heat run test in the factory on the type tested unit. Throughout, the aim
is to use a scorecard listing all aspects and relative evidence.

b. Dielectric
The first indication of a dielectric problem usually comes from routine DGA tests or site RFI
surveys. The priority with such faults is to determine the location of the fault, so that its
seriousness can be assessed: a common source of dielectric faults is sparking at loose winding
clamping bolts, which can be tolerated to some degree, and often remedied, but internal
winding discharge faults are harder to locate and correct, and often result in a decision to
replace the transformer. The investigation of suspected discharge faults is often problematic:
in their early stages of development it can be difficult to detect discharge electrically even
though there is clear evidence from DGA of a problem - either because of sensitivity
problems or because the discharge is intermittent, perhaps only occurring under certain
circumstances. The use of high sensitivity UHF probes inserted through oil sampling valves
can help in both respects [3]. When active, discharges can usually be located on-line using
ultra-sonic sensors, but it is becoming increasingly difficult to sanction such activity because
of Health and Safety concerns.

The most well established and consistent off-line test for detecting deterioration due to
dielectric problems is the so called Doble test measuring the tangent deltas / power factors
of winding insulations. Values for units in good condition are well established, and can be
related back to factory tests. There can be various explanations for poor power factors,
including excessive moisture and aged oil in addition to dielectric faults, so other so-called
dielectric response tests, most notably recovery voltage measurements (RVM), polarising
currents (PDC) and dielectric frequency response (DFR), have been developed to try to
discriminate between the various causes. The interpretation of the results from these tests has
been evaluated by CIGRE [4] and some errors have been found, but work is still on-going in
this area to verify estimates of solid insulation moisture content. A more recent CIGRE
working group [5] has recommended the use of relative saturation probes for assessing
moisture problems in power transformers.
SESSION I-1
International Conference on Condition Monitoring & Diagnostic Engineering Management of Power Station / Substation Equipment - 2009

When a dielectric fault involving the winding insulations is suspected, discharge location at
up to working voltage is often required to confirm this, and this may have to be carried out by
back-energisation using an external source. One recent such case involved the investigation
of a 275/33 kV transformer that tripped out of service after a lightning strike to the remote
end of the attached line. An off-line Doble test pointed to a dielectric fault affecting the
centre phase (Figure 4). To confirm this, in view of the fact that the lightning strike was to
another phase, a decision was made to back-energise using a diesel generator set and step-up
transformer. This confirmed a dielectric fault at the top of the centre phase, which is thought
to have arisen as a result of an internal over-voltage arising when the line was automatically
re-energised after the lightning strike.

3,699 pF
0.34 %
3,730 pF
0.43 %
3,736 pF
0.35 %
HV to LV
13,405 pF
0.38 %
LV to earth
4,173 pF
0.60 %
3,945 pF
0.96 %
4,156 pF
0.57 %
HV to earth
C phase B phase A phase Insulation
Capacitances and Power Factors
3,699 pF
0.34 %
3,730 pF
0.43 %
3,736 pF
0.35 %
HV to LV
13,405 pF
0.38 %
LV to earth
4,173 pF
0.60 %
3,945 pF
0.96 %
4,156 pF
0.57 %
HV to earth
C phase B phase A phase Insulation
Capacitances and Power Factors

Figure 4: Doble test results for failed transformer

c. Thermal
Thermal ageing is best assessed from knowledge of load and operating temperature regime,
moisture levels and an oil test for Furan compounds and dissolved gases (i.e. much of this
aspect can be assessed from in-service oil tests undertaken as part of the initial review).
Paper ageing should be indicated by Furan levels, but care is needed in the interpretation
since Furan levels depend on the paper and oil preservation system [6], and DPT experience
[7] is that the relationship between paper ageing (degree of polymerisation) and Furan levels
is more complicated than published correlations, depending very much whether the ageing is
general or localised.
Particular dissolved gas combinations will indicate the presence of localized overheating, and
whether it involves cellulose or is a bare metal problem. There are several areas where
localized overheating can occur, e.g. in internal and external leads and connections, or
circulating currents between the core and frame or tank earth. Sometimes the cause is with
oil cooling systems, defective fans and blocked radiator sections. These faults are sometimes
diagnosed using infra red scans; certainly this will pick out poor bushing helmet connections,
low oil levels, some OLTC contact issues and tank heating from stray flux or frame to tank
circulating currents. The basic off-line test to detect any winding joint or tap-changer contact
problems is winding resistance using special equipment designed to cope with the highly
inductive load. Core circulating current problems can be checked by basic DC insulation
tests, but if the core and frame earths are not brought out externally, this will require the oil in
the main tank to be dropped to access connections. Core problems can also be diagnosed by
FRA tests and by excitation current measurements.
SESSION I-1
International Conference on Condition Monitoring & Diagnostic Engineering Management of Power Station / Substation Equipment - 2009

d. Mechanical
For a complete assessment it is important that transformers are specifically tested for
evidence of winding deformation caused by short-circuit type events such as through faults,
close-up lightning strikes, tap-changer faults and faulty synchronisation, since this type of
damage cannot be detected by DGA until inter-turn insulation damage arises. Transformers
would normally be expected to survive a limited number of short-circuit events, but the
probability of survival will lessen with the number of such events and any loss of winding
clamping due to ageing. The traditional test to detect residual winding deformation likely to
impair future reliability is winding short-circuit impedance, but this is recognised to have
limitations regarding sensitivity. Over recent years there has been good experience in the UK
of detecting mechanical problems using a sweep frequency response analysis (SFRA)
technique [8], and this is now internationally recognised as the most reliable diagnostic for
mechanical condition [9]. The failure modes that have been detected using this method are:
hoop buckling of inner winding, conductor tipping, conductor telescoping, coil clamping
failure, end insulation collapse, spiral tightening and lead displacement. In most cases
winding movement can be detected without reference results by comparing the responses of
the three phases, as illustrated in Figure 5 which shows responses measured on a large
transmission transformer which failed seven years after a close-up lightning strike as a result
of axial collapse of the end insulation. Excellent repeatability for FRA allows responses on
one unit to be used as references for all others of the same design.

Figure 5: SFRA responses indicating winding movement for a phase


e. Tap changer
Routine oil samples from separate tap-changer selector compartments can provide an on-line
indication of contact overheating and discharge problems which can usually be addressed at
the next maintenance outage. The principle supplementary off-line tests to check for contact
and other problems are winding resistance and turns ratio measurements at different tap
positions. It is also possible to identify defects at specific tap positions non-invasively using
the UHF interference test with the unit on load.
T4681 8/11/01
0 0.5 1 1.5 2
-60
-50
-40
-30
-20
Frequency (MHz)
Amplitude (dB)
A phase

B phase

C phase

SESSION I-1
International Conference on Condition Monitoring & Diagnostic Engineering Management of Power Station / Substation Equipment - 2009

f. Bushings
The most usual assessment of bushings is an off-line test for dielectric quality by power
factor and capacitance measurements. Alternatively, an oil sample can be taken for dissolved
gas analysis, and some utilities now insist on this as a mid-life check, but with most designs
taking an oil sample involves an extended outage, involving disconnections to access the oil
volume, and insertion of a tube to extract the sample: this is not easy and can create
problems. In a recent investigation following a catastrophic bushing failure at a UK power
station, 9 other generator transformer bushings were tested, 7 of which had power factors
identical to the factory test value of 0.25%, while two others had values of 0.35% and
subsequent oil analyses showed these two had hydrogen levels of around 10,000ppm.
Obviously it is not easy to justify replacement based on small changes in power factor, but
this example shows that with an instrument capable of making repeatable measurements in
adverse electrical environments it is possible to detect degradation at an early stage. Risk
management of the suspect bushings in this case was achieved by fitting an on-line
monitoring of power factor.

g. Oil condition

In addition to DGA, various other tests on oil samples are carried out, e.g. acidity, resistivity,
interfacial tension, etc., to check the oil quality. The aim is to identify ageing and
contamination from fibres and particles. Oil ageing itself is important and may require oil
processing or replacement. High moisture content could be due to a failure of the dryer or a
seal leak. This could lead to a faster deterioration in paper ageing and in the extreme will lead
to acidic attack and sludging. Particles and moisture will also reduce the dielectric strength
of the oil and lead to flashover.

4 Case Example

As an illustration of the practical value of the above-mentioned process, the following case
example is offered.

In 2002, the routine quarterly analysis of DGA results using the DPT DGA scoring system
highlighted an abnormal result for a 400/275 kV 750 MVA transmission transformer, which
was apparently operating normally, with no history of any protection operations. The
increase in score was due mainly to a step change in hydrogen, but closer inspection of the
DGA results also revealed step changes in acetylene and ethylene. The fact that these
changes had coincided with the failure of a CT on the HV side of the transformer, and that
arcing/sparking faults were not expected for this design gave cause for concern. Although
well below IEEE and CIGRE recommendations for normal gas levels, the transformer was
marked as having a suspected fault in the Asset Health Review, and a detailed condition
assessment was recommended at the next convenient outage.

In 2005 condition assessment tests were carried out at the next planned maintenance outage.
Insulation tests provided some indication of a serious winding problem with the centre phase,
which was confirmed by an FRA test. A recommendation was made to replace the
transformer, to avoid a forced outage in the future. Since this would require the outage to be
extended, with knock-on consequences for network operation, the network operator required
more evidence that the transformer was suffering a serious problem, so an internal inspection
was organised, even though these are often inconclusive. However, on this occasion the top
SESSION I-1
International Conference on Condition Monitoring & Diagnostic Engineering Management of Power Station / Substation Equipment - 2009
clamping board on the centre phase was found to be fractured unmistakeable evidence that
the transformer had sustained serious damage, and was therefore not in a fit state to be
returned to service. The subsequent scrapping revealed the full extent of the damage: hoop
buckling of the innermost common winding layer and a partial collapse of the tertiary
winding. The transformer had clearly been in service with this degree of damage for some
years.


5 Conclusions

The Asset Health Review provides the asset manager with a means of carrying out a risk
assessment of his transformer population in terms of condition and the presence of damage.
Using evidence from tear downs and knowledge of past and future operating regimes it
should be possible to estimate life expectancy and opportunities to overload. It will also
indicate damaged units and these need to be life managed.

The key to achieving a successful diagnosis relies upon having a good understanding of the
performance of the design groups, failure modes, past and future operating conditions, an
effective analysis process, and most importantly the use of effective test equipment capable
of giving accurate and repeatable results independent of operators and electrical interference
levels on different sites.

Having completed such a comprehensive review it is then possible to prioritise further
actions, e.g.
! Asset replacement planning
! Any corrective maintenance required
! Any further on-line monitoring or off-line testing required.

6 References

[1] Lapworth, J. A., A Novel Approach (Scoring System) for Integrating Dissolved Gas
Analysis Results into a Life Management System, IEEE International Symposium on
Electrical Insulation (ISEI), 2002 Proceedings, pp 137-144.

[2] IEEE Guide for the Interpretation of Gases Generated in Oil-Immersed Transformers,
IEEE Std C57.104-1991

[3] Markalous, S., Detection and Location of PD in Power Transformers using Acoustic
and Electromagnetic Signals, Ph.D Thesis, University of Stuttgart, 2006.

[4] Gubanski, S. M. et. al., Dielectric Response Methods for Diagnostics of Power
Transformers, Report of Task Force D1.01.09, CIGRE Brochure No. 254, August 2004.

[5] Sokolov, V., et. al., Moisture Equilibrium and Moisture Migration Within
Transformer Insulation Systems, Report of Working Group A2.30, CIGRE Brochure No.
349, 2008.

[6] Lewand, L. R., Practical experience gained from furanic compound analysis Proc.
2006 International Conf. of Doble Clients, Boston, USA
SESSION I-1
International Conference on Condition Monitoring & Diagnostic Engineering Management of Power Station / Substation Equipment - 2009

[7] Lapworth, J. A., Heywood, R. J., Jarman, P. N. and Myers, C., Transformer
Insulation: Towards More Reliable Residual Life Assessments, CIGRE A2 Colloquium
paper PS1-16, Bruges, 2007

[8] Lapworth, J. A., and Jarman, P. N., UK Experience of the Use of Frequency
Response Analysis (FRA) for Detecting Winding Movement Faults in Large Power
Transformers, 2003 CIGRE Transformer Colloquium, Merida, Mexico.

[9] Picher, P., et. al., Mechanical Condition Assessment of Transformer Windings Using
Frequency Response Analysis, Report of CIGRE Working Group A2.26, CIGRE Brochure
No. 342, 2007.