Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
Case #1 - GSU
James W. Graham
Alliant Energy
Transformer Data
161kV GrY 22.8kV Delta
720/806.4 MVA 55/65C
Shell Form circa 1980
Isophase Secondary Bus
Direct Connection to Unit
13,900 gallons of oil
762,200 lbs. total weight
First Steps
Inspection
Damage Assessment
Review Known Data
System Impact
Initial Inspection
& Damage Assessment
Field Tests
Winding damage confirmed
Arresters OK
Bushings OK
A DETC Dislocated
Staley Bridge
345kV Option
Transformer Options
Purchase new 345-24kV transformer
Select Proposal
Disadvantages
Rule of Thumb
Repairing a transformer may be viable if the
repair cost is 50-75% of a comparable new
transformer.
The upper limit is dependent on your companys
risk management policy and good engineering
judgment.
Repair Considerations
Scope of Work
LV Coil Removal
(Undamaged Section)
LV Coil Removal
(Undamaged Section)
First Damaged
High Voltage Coil
Spring Washer
Missing
Spade lug
Case #1
Failure Summary
Test Data Prior to Failure Normal
Some Core Damage Evident
Minor Tank Damage due to fault pressure
A HV Winding Failure one section
Heavy Distortion in HV Coils
LV Coils Mechanical Damage Only
DETC Terminals Disconnected
DETC Tap 3 Terminals & Contacts Burned
DETC Leads Prone to Loosen
Case #1
Cause of Failure?
The post-fault inspection and results of the tear down
indicate one or both of the active DETC leads fell open,
subjecting the high voltage winding to a severe
overvoltage condition. The winding failure probably
started as a turn to turn or disk to disk failure.
Since the GSU was directly connected to the generator,
the fault levels were extremely high and persisted for a
significant period of time. This helps explain the coil
distortions.
Transformer Data
24kV D 7.2kV-7.2kV GrY
35/39.2 MVA 55/65C
Core Form circa 1979
Isophase HV Bus
Non-segregated LV Bus
3,765 gallons of oil
106,050 lbs. total weight
Situation Assessment
No indication of problems prior to failure
Preventative maintenance recently completed
Twin Main Aux. Xfmr still available for service
Test data confirmed winding damage
2nd Failure at plant in 8 months
Concern - is this failure related to GSU failure?
Tear Down - A
LV Winding
Coil
Deformation
Tear Down - A
HV Winding
Conductor
Damage HV Disk
#26 A
Outer LV
Winding Tube
Damage - A
Case #2
Failure Summary
Predictive maintenance completed within 6 mos.
Test Data Prior to Failure Normal
A HV Winding Damage primarily in 2 disks
No damage in either LV Coil of A
No damage in B or C
No core damage
Heating damage indicated high currents
Relays did not detect high current flow
Case #2
Cause of Failure?
The results of the tear down indicate a turn to turn failure
in the A high voltage winding. The heat damage and coil
deflections observed indicates localized high current flow
within the winding, which is consistent with this type of
fault. This current was not detected until the conductor
burned through and a more serious fault developed. At
that point the differential relay operated followed by the
sudden pressure relay.
This failure appeared to be random and not related to the
earlier GSU failure.