Transformer Bushing Reliability Survey & Risk Mitigation Measures (Part 2 of 2)

Advertisement
PPC Insulators bushing Transformer Bushing Reliability Survey & Risk Mitigation Measures (Part 2 of 2) banner530x150 modified

Statistics show that bushings are one of the main contributors to transformer failure. Their failure therefore has huge impact on reliability as well as safety of the system and operators managing the asset. With this in mind, major utilities in southeast Asia embarked on a joint bushing reliability survey and also jointly formulated mitigation measures to improve bushing performance. The survey, discussed in this contribution to INMR by engineers S. Gobi Kannan, Chitapon Jedwanna and Henny Ika, respectively at Tenaga Nasional Berhad (TNB) in Malaysia, the Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand (EGAT) and Perusahaan Listrik Negara (PLN) in Indonesia, summarized failure and root cause at each participating utility between 2001 and 2015. The different practices among members were discussed with a view to improving selection, specification, design, condition assessment, storage and handling of bushings. These changes were deemed necessary to have real impact on safety and performance of transformers and the grid as a whole.

Existing maintenance practices, standards and bushing technologies are all well established in the industry, although each have relative advantages and disadvantages. Drawbacks in practices are due mainly to differences in existing maintenance strategies and in acceptance criteria to address bushing degradation. There are also non-standardized dimensional requirements in terms of ease of maintenance and strategic spare requirements. For example, the disadvantages of an oil-impregnated paper (OIP) stye bushing are mainly related to fire risk and environmental problems. In the case of resin-impregnated (RIP) bushings, risk of moisture uptake during storage is a major issue. These disadvantages must be addressed individually to formulate an action plan to improve bushing performance. Looking to the future, some member utilities also embarked on new technology solutions including resin-impregnated synthetics (RIS) bushings and RIP moisture barriers technology, still under evaluation.


Cases of Failure

This section reviews several cases of bushing failure for purpose of compilation of lessons learnt and improvements made by the utility members to reduce risk of similar accidents.

Failure #1: Copper Migration Phenomenon on 300 kV Bushing Manufactured in 1996

bushing Transformer Bushing Reliability Survey & Risk Mitigation Measures (Part 2 of 2) Bushing Reliability
CLICK TO ENLARGE
bushing Transformer Bushing Reliability Survey & Risk Mitigation Measures (Part 2 of 2) Bushing Reliability1
Fig 8: Arcing erosion damage on solid copper conductor near bottom flange.
CLICK TO ENLARGE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Root Cause: Site and laboratory examination with historical failure records suggest that the dielectric insulation breakdown were likely due to one or a combination of the following:

• Poor stress control design of the bushing, resulting in high electrical stress at certain locations along the paper/foil insulation;

• Poor manufacturing quality as seen in lab examination in some paper/foil insulation layers leading to uneven distribution of electrical stresses;

• Development of electrical treeing along the insulation as a result of copper migration and accelerated by high electrical stresses.

bushing Transformer Bushing Reliability Survey & Risk Mitigation Measures (Part 2 of 2) Screen Shot 2018 02 16 at 11
Fig. 9: Evidence reveals penknife type marks and presence of pinholes along aluminum foil layers. Possibly explained by poor stress control/manufacturing practices.
CLICK TO ENLARGE
bushing Transformer Bushing Reliability Survey & Risk Mitigation Measures (Part 2 of 2) Presence of darkish substance
Fig. 10: Presence of darkish substance ‘black trees’ were evident at foil joint areas and are evidence of Cu2S formation due to possible copper migration phenomenon.
CLICK TO ENLARGE
bushing Transformer Bushing Reliability Survey & Risk Mitigation Measures (Part 2 of 2) substation 1
Fig. 11: Further study links failure to use of potentially corrosive oil prior to 2008 on similar designs of bushings, apart from poor manufacturing practice.
CLICK TO ENLARGE
bushing Transformer Bushing Reliability Survey & Risk Mitigation Measures (Part 2 of 2) inmr4
CLICK TO ENLARGE

 

Advertisement
Recotec Ad bushing Transformer Bushing Reliability Survey & Risk Mitigation Measures (Part 2 of 2) Reinhausen

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Failure #2: Test Tap Problems

Surveys indicate that 10% of bushing failures at ASEAN utilities relate to test tap problems. In this incident, it was found that the test tap measurement and tap bushing had no continuity. Insulation resistance measurements conducted indicated an open circuit. Further disassembly of the test tap indicated the following:

bushing Transformer Bushing Reliability Survey & Risk Mitigation Measures (Part 2 of 2) Evidence of cracks on metallic Al flange near test tap location
Fig. 12: Evidence of cracks on metallic Al flange near test tap location.
CLICK TO ENLARGE
bushing Transformer Bushing Reliability Survey & Risk Mitigation Measures (Part 2 of 2) Screen Shot 2018 02 16 at 12
Fig. 13: Evidence of discharge activities and oil contamination on core fragments seen as result of floating potential and issues of improper grounding of test tap layer.
CLICK TO ENLARGE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

bushing Transformer Bushing Reliability Survey & Risk Mitigation Measures (Part 2 of 2) Spring mechanism jammed and sparking marks
Fig. 14: Spring mechanism jammed and sparking marks found on slider and tap housing.
CLICK TO ENLARGE

Based on utility experience, the majority of test tap failures within the region have been attributed to spring-loaded design versus permanent connection types, as illustrated in Figs. 15 and 16. Poor spring contact pressure over years and possible damage during high surge current flow were concluded to be possible root causes. Failure leads to floating potential and arcing at the last layer of the condenser design bushings. This can cause contamination of insulating oil at bottom side of the bushing and eventually a dielectric failure breakdown.

Advertisement
bushing Transformer Bushing Reliability Survey & Risk Mitigation Measures (Part 2 of 2) CSL Advertisement e1477326535980
bushing Transformer Bushing Reliability Survey & Risk Mitigation Measures (Part 2 of 2) Spring Loaded Type
Fig 15 : Spring Loaded Type.
CLICK TO ENLARGE
bushing Transformer Bushing Reliability Survey & Risk Mitigation Measures (Part 2 of 2) Permanent Soldered Type
Fig. 16: Permanent Soldered Type.
CLICK TO ENLARGE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Failure #3: Draw Lead Bushing Fast Transient Issue in GIS/RCT Sub

Root Cause: Loss of dielectric strength of the main condenser insulation due to heat generated along the bushing’s aluminium tube as a result of fast and very fast transient phenomena in the system during switching.

bushing Transformer Bushing Reliability Survey & Risk Mitigation Measures (Part 2 of 2) Flashover evident at top location of bushing draw lead
Fig. 17: Flashover evident at top location of bushing draw lead and aluminium tubing. Transformer re-energized safely after bushing replacement.
CLICK TO ENLARGE
bushing Transformer Bushing Reliability Survey & Risk Mitigation Measures (Part 2 of 2) Screen Shot 2018 02 16 at 14
CLICK TO ENLARGE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

bushing Transformer Bushing Reliability Survey & Risk Mitigation Measures (Part 2 of 2) Arcing damages evident at draw lead conductor
Fig. 18: Arcing damages evident at draw lead conductor and correspondingly at aluminium draw tube.
CLICK TO ENLARGE

 

bushing Transformer Bushing Reliability Survey & Risk Mitigation Measures (Part 2 of 2) inmr 5 1
Fig. 19: Tube was divided into 8 sections designated by sections A to H. As shown, this revealed several arcing marks along tube as evidence of possible very fast transient activities due to GIS switching activities at station. Observation indicates several arcing marks along tube and more concentrated arcing marks were evident at air side of tube and of higher severity compared to arcing marks at oil side of tube.
CLICK TO ENLARGE
bushing Transformer Bushing Reliability Survey & Risk Mitigation Measures (Part 2 of 2) inmr
CLICK TO ENLARGE

 

 

 

Advertisement
BPG International Advertisement bushing Transformer Bushing Reliability Survey & Risk Mitigation Measures (Part 2 of 2) BPG logo

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

bushing Transformer Bushing Reliability Survey & Risk Mitigation Measures (Part 2 of 2) Sign of overheating erosion and arcing marks along aluminum tube
Fig. 20: Sign of overheating erosion and arcing marks along aluminum tube.
CLICK TO ENLARGE
bushing Transformer Bushing Reliability Survey & Risk Mitigation Measures (Part 2 of 2) Arcing and flow of internal circulating
Fig. 21: Arcing and flow of internal circulating current between draw leads and aluminium tubing.
CLICK TO ENLARGE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Measurement of Power Factor and Capacitance on the bushing prior to the failure did not indicate any abnormalities, as illustrated in Table 7.

bushing Transformer Bushing Reliability Survey & Risk Mitigation Measures (Part 2 of 2) 10 kV Power Factor Capacitance Measurement
Table 7: 10 kV Power Factor & Capacitance Measurement.
CLICK TO ENLARGE
bushing Transformer Bushing Reliability Survey & Risk Mitigation Measures (Part 2 of 2) Damaged paper insulation for draw lead of bushings
Fig. 22: Damaged paper insulation for draw lead of bushings.
CLICK TO ENLARGE

The phenomenon of fast transients on draw leads of bushings is still not fully understood in the field. Evidence of arcing/sparking between draw lead and aluminum tube at common potential raises concern, especially in regard to reactive compensator or GIS substation installation failures. By way of improvement, the specification has been revised such that for bushings with draw lead connections, the transformer manufacturer shall ensure the draw lead cable within the tube is insulated using thermally upgraded insulation material with a minimal thickness of 1 mm. This, without causing any significant rise in hot spot temperature of the bushing to prevent arcing between draw lead to aluminum tubing during any systemic fast transient phenomena.

Failure #4: Monkey Damage to Polymeric Insulators (Still Unresolved)

As initiative to reduce risk of explosion and deal with pollution concerns, some member utilities have begun application of polymeric insulators as means to reduce such risks. However, there have been cases of polymeric-housed bushings being attacked by animals such as monkeys that chew the insulators. Discussions have been conducted with suppliers looking into the possibility to inhibit this through use of repellents but no commercial solution is yet offered in the marketplace for transformer bushings. In recent years, sheds damaged this way require urgent replacement to prevent external flashovers and avoid possible moisture ingress into the main condenser layers. Up to now, utility members have not reported any flashovers given that damaged bushings were detected during routine substation inspection and replaced before such problems could occur.

bushing Transformer Bushing Reliability Survey & Risk Mitigation Measures (Part 2 of 2) Damaged sheds due to animal attack i
Fig. 23: Damaged sheds due to animal attack, i.e monkeys, on polymeric housed bushings.
CLICK TO ENLARGE

Failure #5: Hygroscopic Issues on Resin Impregnated Paper Bushings

Advertisement
bushing Transformer Bushing Reliability Survey & Risk Mitigation Measures (Part 2 of 2) INTEGRATED Engineering Software Mar 11

Resin Impregnated Paper (RIP) bushings are vulnerable if exposed to high humidity during storage or handling and this hygroscopic property needs to be addressed. Long-term exposure under an outdoor environment with high humidity can result in the bottom portion of an RIP bushing absorbing moisture that can then affect performance. Change in colour of the bottom part of these bushings is an indication of this problem, which is a major concern among utility members due to the high humidity environment in this part of the world.

bushing Transformer Bushing Reliability Survey & Risk Mitigation Measures (Part 2 of 2) Sign of wet RIP surface due to exposure to humidity
Fig. 24: Sign of wet RIP surface due to exposure to humidity.
CLICK TO ENLARGE

Measurements performed will not show significant change in C1 parameters, however there is a change in pF C2 values (after assembly) due to humidity ingress at the bottom surface/core of the bushing, as shown in Table 8:

bushing Transformer Bushing Reliability Survey & Risk Mitigation Measures (Part 2 of 2) 10 kV Power Factor Capacitance Measurement 1
Table 8: 10 kV Power Factor & Capacitance Measurement.
CLICK TO ENLARGE

For RIP bushings with high humidity, drying in an oven has been found effective in removing the moisture ingress at their bottom surface. As shown in case study data in Fig 25 and Table 9 below, these issues are usually detectable by high pf C2 values after assembly, while typical values of 2-3% are the acceptable limits recommended by the OEMs. It is typical that PF for the overall bushing (HV terminal to flange) is near to C1 values for dry bushings. This is a useful parameter to monitor during the drying process since pf C2 measurement may not be accurate when the bushing is tested by itself without mounting.

bushing Transformer Bushing Reliability Survey & Risk Mitigation Measures (Part 2 of 2) inmr 3
Fig. 25: RIP drying curve with PF (overall) monitoring over drying cycle.
CLICK TO ENLARGE
bushing Transformer Bushing Reliability Survey & Risk Mitigation Measures (Part 2 of 2) PF Data Over Drying Cycle
Table 9: PF (Overall) Data Over Drying Cycle.
CLICK TO ENLARGE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Initiatives & Risk Mitigation Measures

While risk of fire in transformers due to bushing failures is relatively low, it is not negligible. Prevention of transformer fires and implementation of strategies to prevent loss of life, minimize loss of adjacent assets as well as loss of supply is therefore an essential part of managing transformer assets. The goals of the strategies or initiatives proposed below are to address and quantify the risk of such fires and provide guidance on how fire risk can be managed most cost effectively.

The following list of risk mitigation measures is based on discussions and best practices between utility members and deemed effective to improve the performance of bushings in the grid:

1. RIP Bushings are preferred instead of OIP for condenser bushing classes 52 kV and above;

2. Procure only from suppliers with proven designs. A product pre-qualification process is recommended;

3. Oil filling and sampling is not recommended unless performed by personnel with related competence or under OEM supervision. This is applicable only for OIP bushings;

4. Enhance maintenance practices by all member utilities, including

• Replace and monitor bushings exceeding acceptable criteria;

• Power factor and capacitance measurements are sensitive parameters to detect incipient problems;

Advertisement
Yizumi Ad bushing Transformer Bushing Reliability Survey & Risk Mitigation Measures (Part 2 of 2) INMR YIZUMI July edition

• Thermal scanning at least once every 6 months;

• Visual inspection at least bi-monthly looking for leakage and severe external contamination.

5. Follow storage and handling guide for RIP and OIP as per OEM recommendation. Fig. 26 below shows proper storage practice on a long-term basis exceeding 12 months. Long-term storage is done with specially designed metallic covers filled with dry transformer oil.

bushing Transformer Bushing Reliability Survey & Risk Mitigation Measures (Part 2 of 2) Current best practice for long term storage
Fig. 26: Current best practice for long term storage.
CLICK TO ENLARGE

Use of an RIP protection coating as a water barrier is under evaluation and requires further study on effectiveness in the field:

• One standard uncoated RIP bushing

• Bushing with water barrier protective coating

bushing Transformer Bushing Reliability Survey & Risk Mitigation Measures (Part 2 of 2) Standard bushing and RIP water barriercoated bushing
Fig. 27: Standard bushing and RIP water barrier-coated bushing.
CLICK TO ENLARGE
bushing Transformer Bushing Reliability Survey & Risk Mitigation Measures (Part 2 of 2) Screen Shot 2018 02 16 at 14
Fig. 28: 145 kV bushing with water barrier protective coating.
CLICK TO ENLARGE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fig. 29 below illustrates moisture ingress testing on a standard bushing and a bushing with the special coating currently being used by some member utilities. Test results are shown below.

bushing Transformer Bushing Reliability Survey & Risk Mitigation Measures (Part 2 of 2) Std bushing under water ingression test
Fig 29 : Std bushing under water ingression test.
CLICK TO ENLARGE
bushing Transformer Bushing Reliability Survey & Risk Mitigation Measures (Part 2 of 2) inmr1 1
CLICK TO ENLARGE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Based on water ingress tests, it can be concluded:

• Effectiveness of a water barrier coating is still under field evaluation;

• Experimental analysis proves the barrier coat prolongs duration of moisture or water ingress into bushing layers by multiple of about 80 versus compared to uncoated RIP bushings;

• Increase in power factor despite use of this coating suggests that the coating is effective for handling but not for long-term storage purposes.

6. Design/Specification

• No migration of moisture must be possible through the external insulation to the RIP insulation condenser body. All bushings rated voltage 52 kV and above shall have either fibreglass or an alternative proven material that acts as moisture barrier between the RIP condenser body and the external composite insulator. Fig. 30 illustrates such a fibre glass moisture barrier for RIP bushing designs. There are also OEMs that use pure resin or SF6 foam instead for similar purposes. This is acceptable among all utility members.

bushing bushing Transformer Bushing Reliability Survey & Risk Mitigation Measures (Part 2 of 2) Water Barrier for RIP Bushing Construction using Fibre glass materia
Fig 30 : Water Barrier for RIP Bushing Construction using Fibre glass material.
CLICK TO ENLARGE

7. For purpose of interchangeability and standardization, oil-air bushings of rated voltage 52 kV and above shall comply with standard bushing requirements in terms of dimension and rating as shown in the sample bushing dimensional standardization (Fig. 31 below). This has already been successfully implemented by one member utility.

Advertisement
Desma Advertisement bushing Transformer Bushing Reliability Survey & Risk Mitigation Measures (Part 2 of 2) Desma banner Apr 26
bushing Transformer Bushing Reliability Survey & Risk Mitigation Measures (Part 2 of 2) Screen Shot 2018 02 16 at 15
Fig. 31: Sample bushing dimensional standardization for different ratings.
CLICK TO ENLARGE

8.For existing units in service in terms of replacement or refurbishment, it is recommended that the bushing be supplied to exactly match the existing dimensions. This to ensure bottom clearances are met as per initial design and to prevent substantial modification and retrofitting work at the site;

9. All type tests and routine tests shall be carried out according to the latest IEC or IEEE standard requirements. Type test reports and certificates shall be submitted to the user on delivery;

10. Partial discharge test shall be performed in accordance with requirements of the latest version of IEC 60137. Routine measurements to detect internal PD shall be, at maximum, virtually discharge free ≤5pC at 1.05 Um/ Ö3 and ≤5pc at 2.0 Um/Ö3, where the more stringent requirement(s) shall apply. If the bushing fails the PD test, it shall be rejected and not be reconditioned for later use in the system.

11. For bushings with draw lead connection, the transformer manufacturer shall ensure the draw lead cable within the tube shall be insulated using thermally upgraded insulation material with minimal thickness of 1 mm. This without causing any significant rise in hot spot temperature of the bushing so as to prevent any arcing between draw lead to aluminum tubing during any system fast transient phenomenon;

12. For fixed solid conductors, the transformer manufacturer will ensure a flexible lead is provided between transformer and bushing to avoid any vibration and dilatation being transmitted during operation;

bushing Transformer Bushing Reliability Survey & Risk Mitigation Measures (Part 2 of 2) Screen Shot 2018 02 16 at 14
Fig. 32: Air insulated cable box with arc venting facility.
CLICK TO ENLARGE

13. The current rating of bushings to be supplied shall be inclusive of overload factor of at least 1.2 times maximum rated current for transformer rated capacity;

14. The test tap shall be manufactured from non-corrodible material and be sealed by means of non-corrodible screw-on dust cover during service. A reusable (oil, heat and UV resistance) seal shall be provided to prevent ingress of moisture and or other impurities from entering the test tap. Use of nitrile rubber with sufficient material hardness is preferred;

15. The internal connection of the test tap to the outmost condenser foil layer is by means of permanent electrical connection. Spring loaded type internal connections are not recommended due to previous poor service performance caused by loss of spring contact pressure over time period;

16. Air insulated cable boxes on transformers shall have arc venting. Such venting could prevent damage to the cable box, dislocation of the cables and breakage of bushings, as shown in Fig. 32;

17. Use of an online monitoring system is recommended for critical installations. It is the prerogative of member utilities to study the suitability of different technologies available to assess bushing conditions in the field. This handbook does not state any preference. Fig. 33 illustrates installation of a bushing monitoring on a power transformer and one sample case study findings are elaborated;

bushing Transformer Bushing Reliability Survey & Risk Mitigation Measures (Part 2 of 2) Bushing monitoring system installed on power transformer
Fig. 33: Bushing monitoring system installed on power transformer.
CLICK TO ENLARGE

• Findings revealed comparison of offline and online monitoring information relatively agreed for bushings in a healthy state (Refer Table 10). The system can serve as a useful tool to monitor relative change in bushing condition. However, the benefits of such system have to be considered on a case-by-case basis, comparing risk to equipment of the system being monitored against the economics and reliability of such a monitoring system.

bushing Transformer Bushing Reliability Survey & Risk Mitigation Measures (Part 2 of 2) table
Table 10: Power Factor/Capacitance Data Comparison Between Online Measurement vs 10 kV Offline Values
CLICK TO ENLARGE

18. Using resin impregnated fibre technology for dry bushings to mitigate issues related to the hydroscopic properties of conventional epoxy resin impregnated bushings with conventional paper insulation. TNB embarked on a First Pilot Project in Malaysia in 2013.

• A Pilot project was conducted at 170 kV using new RIS technology. Results, as illustrated in Table 11, indicate superior performance compared to conventional RIP bushings.

bushing Transformer Bushing Reliability Survey & Risk Mitigation Measures (Part 2 of 2) First RIS bushing installation
Fig. 34: First RIS bushing installation at TNB Malaysia.
CLICK TO ENLARGE

Table 11 below summarizes the parameters measured and evaluation throughout the evaluation period against acceptance criteria by the project team:

bushing Transformer Bushing Reliability Survey & Risk Mitigation Measures (Part 2 of 2) Results of Measurements of Online Bushing Monitoring
Table 11: Results of Measurements of Online Bushing Monitoring.
CLICK TO ENLARGE

19. Overvoltage Protection

• Metal oxide surge arresters are an important part of transformer protection in reducing risk of a transformer failure due to surges or transients in the system. All line terminals of the transformer should be protected by surge arresters.

bushing Transformer Bushing Reliability Survey & Risk Mitigation Measures (Part 2 of 2) Surge arrester protection near transformer terminal 1
Fig 35: Surge arrester protection near transformer terminal.
CLICK TO ENLARGE

Conclusions

Despite relatively low failure rate compared to the total population of bushings in the system, failure of bushings has a catastrophic impact on reliability, availability and safety of the ASEAN grid. This survey and development of the first ASEAN Bushing Guidebook offers significant benefit to standardize and review existing practices. This so that they will be in line with the best practice of international standards and also as outlined by several effective risk mitigation measures and improvements based on previous incidences of failure. The effective implementation of these proposed risk mitigation measures and continuous improvement will improve performance in general with reduction in bushing failures among members versus in past years.