Development of A Filter Using Absorbant Technologies For The Removal of Coking Precursers

Development of a Filter Using Absorbant
Technologies for the Removal of Coking

Precursers
Laboratory Evaluation
Technical Report
Development of a Filter Using
Absorbent Technologies for the
Removal of Coking Precursors
Laboratory Evaluation
1002048
Interim Report, November 2003
Cosponsor
B.C. Hydro
6911 Southpoint Drive
Burnaby, B.C., V3N 4X8
Canada
Project Managers
M. Lau
D. Olan
EPRI Project Manager

B. Ward
EPRI • 3412 Hillview Avenue, Palo Alto, California 94304 • PO Box 10412, Palo Alto, California 94303 • USA
800.313.3774 • 650.855.2121 • askepri@epri.com • www.epri.com
DISCLAIMER OF WARRANTIES AND LIMITATION OF LIABILITIES
THIS DOCUMENT WAS PREPARED BY THE ORGANIZATION(S) NAMED BELOW AS AN
ACCOUNT OF WORK SPONSORED OR COSPONSORED BY THE ELECTRIC POWER RESEARCH
INSTITUTE, INC. (EPRI). NEITHER EPRI, ANY MEMBER OF EPRI, ANY COSPONSOR, THE
ORGANIZATION(S) BELOW, NOR ANY PERSON ACTING ON BEHALF OF ANY OF THEM:
(A) MAKES ANY WARRANTY OR REPRESENTATION WHATSOEVER, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, (I)

WITH RESPECT TO THE USE OF ANY INFORMATION, APPARATUS, METHOD, PROCESS, OR
SIMILAR ITEM DISCLOSED IN THIS DOCUMENT, INCLUDING MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS
FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, OR (II) THAT SUCH USE DOES NOT INFRINGE ON OR
INTERFERE WITH PRIVATELY OWNED RIGHTS, INCLUDING ANY PARTY'S INTELLECTUAL
PROPERTY, OR (III) THAT THIS DOCUMENT IS SUITABLE TO ANY PARTICULAR USER'S
CIRCUMSTANCE; OR
(B) ASSUMES RESPONSIBILITY FOR ANY DAMAGES OR OTHER LIABILITY WHATSOEVER

(INCLUDING ANY CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES, EVEN IF EPRI OR ANY EPRI REPRESENTATIVE
HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES) RESULTING FROM YOUR
SELECTION OR USE OF THIS DOCUMENT OR ANY INFORMATION, APPARATUS, METHOD,
PROCESS, OR SIMILAR ITEM DISCLOSED IN THIS DOCUMENT.
ORGANIZATION(S) THAT PREPARED THIS DOCUMENT
Powertech Labs Inc.
ORDERING INFORMATION
Requests for copies of this report should be directed to EPRI Orders and Conferences, 1355 Willow
Way, Suite 278, Concord, CA 94520, (800) 313-3774, press 2 or internally x5379, (925) 609-9169,
(925) 609-1310 (fax).
Electric Power Research Institute and EPRI are registered service marks of the Electric Power
Research Institute, Inc. EPRI. ELECTRIFY THE WORLD is a service mark of the Electric Power
Research Institute, Inc.
Copyright © 2003 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
CITATIONS
This report was prepared by
Powertech Labs Inc.

12388-88th Ave.
Surrey, B.C. V3W 7R7
Canada
Principal Investigators
H. Schellhase
E. Hall
E. Korolenko
S. Kovacevic
This report describes research sponsored by EPRI and B.C. Hydro.
The report is a corporate document that should be cited in the literature in the following manner:
Development of a Filter Using Absorbent Technologies for the Removal of Coking Precursors:
Laboratory Evaluation, EPRI, Palo Alto, CA, and B.C. Hydro, Burnaby, B.C., Canada: 2003.
1002048.
iii
PRODUCT DESCRIPTION
On-load tap changers (LTC) are the single biggest contributor to transformer problems. Their
failure modes may be mechanical, electrical, or related to the quality of the oil and contacts.
Utilities are seeking new strategies for LTC maintenance to minimize these problems and, at the
same time, reduce maintenance costs. EPRI has initiated several projects with a goal of
producing a maintenance-free LTC. One major LTC problem is contact fouling, which can lead
to the buildup of coke deposits on contacts and eventual failure. This report builds on previous
work into the study and effects of LTC oil quality and addresses the formation and removal of
deposit precursors to control contact coking.
Results & Findings

This document describes the findings over the last two years and covers these topics: prevention
of deposit formation, filtration, and on-line LTC oil reconditioning. The work relates to, and is a
continuation of, investigations described in EPRI report 1001775, Load Tap Changer Oil Quality
Analysis—Lessons Learned, which is referenced frequently. The reports overlap in the area of
simple on-line filtration. The former report dealt with stress, oil appearance, and formation of
surface deposits, while this report deals with fundamentals of LTC fouling and ways to control it.
Investigation results show the qualitative and quantitative relationships between contact time,
contact temperature, arc-time, depletion of precursors, and deposit formation. These and other
findings lend themselves to a mathematical construct of contact fouling. Figures show the
relationship between the input of energy in terms of time or the number of switch operations and
soot formation. Soot appears to promote the formation of more soot. A field example for the
successful application of standard in-line filtration is presented as a result of recent laboratory
findings on adsorbent filtration.
Challenges & Objectives

The scope of the present work focused on four main objectives:
1. Investigating the different causes that lead to the formation of deposits and the dynamics
of LTC fouling.
2. Testing commercially available additives for their ability to prevent deposit formation in
LTCs.
3. Evaluating the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) test, D1159, for its
usefulness as a simple technique to indicate oil deterioration in terms of forming
precursors to contact coking.
4. Evaluating on-line filter media to remove coking precursors.
v
Applications, Values & Use
Field samples of LTC oils reveal accumulation of unsaturated volatiles, which are highly
concentrated when an LTC enters the fault/failure mode. Samples from failed LTCs support this
argument. As shown in the laboratory work, LTC oils that contain a high level of deposit
precursors and suspended sediment will eventually gum up and encrust the LTC, leading to
failure. This research has demonstrated that using particular adsorbents as filtration media for
removing these dissolved precursors will reduce or eliminate coking in LTCs. Commercial
applications in LTC oil filtration using this technology have been shown to be practical.
EPRI Perspective
LTCs are the biggest single maintenance item in a substation, making transformer LTC
management one of the most critical issues facing today’s substation engineers. EPRI will
continue to study new technologies that improve LTC reliability and reduce maintenance. This
investigation has contributed a new understanding concerning the effects of oil quality on the
operation and health of LTCs and has shown that it is possible to reduce or even eliminate
coking in LTCs by filtration means.
Approach
Arcing in oil-immersed switchgear (including LTCs) produces—in addition to acetylene,
hydrogen, and particulate carbon—a variety of chemical compounds of unsaturated, aromatic,
poly-aromatic, and colloidal nature. These dissolved compounds are suspected to act as
precursors to certain types of deposits, which under the conditions of thermal stress and ageing
form coke. The precursors in question, due to their chemical characteristics, are especially prone
to yield strongly adhering deposits, typically on hot copper and brass surfaces. Data from the
laboratory, field studies, and the database for in-service LTC support this statement.
The approach taken in this project to understand the effects of precursors is relatively wide in
scope. It involved investigating deposit formations, gas-in-oil analysis, modeling, and filtration
for the removal of soot and coke precursors. Laboratory findings, field data, field examples, and
mathematical modeling are used to explain LTC fouling.
Keywords
Load tap changer
LTC
Fouling
Coke
Additives
Filtration
vi
ABSTRACT
On-load tap-changers (LTC) are recognized as the single biggest contributor to transformer
outages. One failure-mode affecting LTCs is intimately related to increased contact resistance,
thermal run-away, and coking. This project investigated causes of sludge formation and
dynamics of coking in LTCs and the methods to detect and reduce these phenomena. The merits
of on-line oil filtration were evaluated.
In addition to acetylene, hydrogen, and particulate carbon, arcing in oil-immersed switchgear

produces a variety of chemical compounds of unsaturated, aromatic, poly-aromatic, and colloidal
nature. These are suspected to act as precursors to certain types of deposits, which under the
conditions of thermal stress and ageing form coke. The precursors in question, due to their
chemical characteristics, are especially prone to yield strongly adhering deposits, typically on hot
copper and brass surfaces. Data from the laboratory, field studies, and the database for in-service
LTCs support this statement.
Project findings show the qualitative and quantitative relationships between contact time, contact
temperature, arc-time, depletion of precursors, and deposit formation. These and other findings
lend themselves to a mathematical construct of contact fouling.
In lab evaluations, figures show the relationship between the input of energy in terms of time or
the number of switch operations in the field and soot formation. Soot appears to promote the
formation of more soot.
It is important to understand the dynamics of soot formation and coking in the lab as well as in
the field. Consequently, eight "scenarios" from the field (BC Hydro) and the available literature
(Duval) are employed to demonstrate the "diagnostics of coking" using the very visual Triangle
method of presentation.
A field example for successfully applying standard in-line filtration also is presented, followed
by recent laboratory findings on adsorbent filtration.
vii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This study was fully funded by the Electrical Power Research Institute.
B.C. Hydro supported the work conducted at Powertech Labs Inc. by providing field equipment
and technical assistance as needed. We would like to express our sincere thanks to the
following:
Generation Maintenance Services, Burnaby for all their support, help and technical expertise that
they and the staff in the field provided throughout the duration of the study. Many thanks to BC
Hydro's engineering technologists, especially: J. Holzmann and T.J. Lollar, who provided
invaluable practical advice and technical assistance. Salim Hassanali of Powertech for his quiet,
professional "behind the scenes job" for keeping the team informed about the latest
developments and publications concerning transformers and load tap-changers. Barry Ward,
EPRI Project Manager for his technical support and guidance at critical points when decisions
were required.
The principal investigator would like to thank Daunn Davis for the excellent job of Word
Processing this document.
ix
CONTENTS
1 OVERVIEW AND INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................1-1

Overview ...............................................................................................................................1-1
Introduction ...........................................................................................................................1-1
2 BACKGROUND AND PREVIOUS FINDINGS .......................................................................2-1

Background ...........................................................................................................................2-1
Previously Reported Findings ...............................................................................................2-1
3 EXPERIMENTAL....................................................................................................................3-1
Arc Stress..............................................................................................................................3-1
Deposit Formation .................................................................................................................3-3
Figure 3-3: ........................................................................................................................3-3
4 FINDINGS...............................................................................................................................4-1
Deposit Formation .................................................................................................................4-1
Coke Formation: Field Data And Laboratory Results............................................................4-1
Deposit Formation: Pictorial -, Qualitative - and Quantitative Records ............................4-2
Pictorial Records ..............................................................................................................4-4
Gaseous Deposit Precursors: Possible Participation of Simple Triple Bond
Compounds ......................................................................................................................4-8
Solid and Soluble Precursors for Deposits: Soot Formation ............................................4-9
Hot Surface Deposits......................................................................................................4-10
Oil Composition .........................................................................................................4-10
Elemental Composition ..............................................................................................4-12
Pyrolysis and Weight Loss.........................................................................................4-13
Infrared Scan of Hot Surface Deposit (Laboratory)....................................................4-14
Elemental Profile of Deposit by SEM/X-Ray ..............................................................4-15
The Case of the Resting Reversing Switch Assembly...............................................4-16
Electrical Discharge (arcing) and Reverse Refining ..................................................4-16
xi
Reduction of Deposit Formation – Using Additives....................................................4-18
Bromine Number........................................................................................................4-19
5 DISSOLVED GAS-IN-OIL DATA (DGA), SLUDGE FORMATION AND COKING ................5-1

Laboratory Results and LTC Field Data ................................................................................5-1
Scenario 1 – The Manual Presentation ............................................................................5-3
Scenario 2 – Kent: Field Case Study................................................................................5-4
Scenario 3 – DGA – Fingerprint: Normal and Fault Behaviour.........................................5-6
Scenario 4 – A Survey of 350 LTC ...................................................................................5-6
Scenario 5 – Subsets of 350 LTC.....................................................................................5-6
Scenario 6 – Effects of Filtration.....................................................................................5-10
Incipient Coking .........................................................................................................5-11
Scenario 7 – Modified Duval Triangle.............................................................................5-13
Scenario 8 – Data Of An LTC With Three Tanks ...........................................................5-15
6 A COKING MODEL ................................................................................................................6-1

Contact Fouling Model ..........................................................................................................6-1
General Considerations....................................................................................................6-1
Coke Deposition Equation ...........................................................................................6-2
Evaluation of the Parameters ......................................................................................6-3
Analytical and Numerical Solutions..............................................................................6-4
7 SLUDGING: A FIELD INSPECTION ......................................................................................7-1

McLellan (MLN) T3 Tapchanger Inspection, March 30, 2001 ...............................................7-1
8 IN-LINE FILTRATION SYSTEM AND ADSORBENT TECHNOLGIES: ................................8-1

Part 1 - Standard Filtration ....................................................................................................8-1
Introduction.......................................................................................................................8-1
Background ......................................................................................................................8-2
Inspection .........................................................................................................................8-2
Diagnostics .......................................................................................................................8-3
Fault Types ..................................................................................................................8-4
Field-Data ....................................................................................................................8-5
Discussion ........................................................................................................................8-6
Conclusion........................................................................................................................8-7
Part 2...................................................................................................................................8-11
xii
Introduction.....................................................................................................................8-11
Development of a Filtration System Using Adsorbent Technologies .........................8-11
9 COMMENTS/DISCUSSION....................................................................................................9-1
Comments .............................................................................................................................9-1
Discussion .............................................................................................................................9-1
10 CONCLUSION....................................................................................................................10-1
Recent Experimental Findings Related To Coking..............................................................10-1
Laboratory Results and Fouling Model...........................................................................10-1
A Review Of DGA, Sludge Formation And Coking..............................................................10-1
Laboratory Results and LTC Field Data .........................................................................10-1
Examples of a Field Inspection.......................................................................................10-2
McLellan (MLN) T3 Tap-changer Inspection, Soot Formation, March 30, 2001 ........10-2
Mission (MIS) Tap-changer Inspection, ASEA UZERT 380/500, 21 Taps: T1
LTC and T2 LTC, Standard Filtration, June – October, 2001 ....................................10-2
11 RECOMMENDATIONS ......................................................................................................11-1
Possible Options To Eliminate Or Reduce Coke Formation ...............................................11-1
12 REFERENCES ...................................................................................................................12-1
A APPENDIX ............................................................................................................................ A-1
xiii
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 3-1 Schematic of Arcing Setup .......................................................................................3-1

Figure 3-2 Arcing Apparatus ......................................................................................................3-2
Figure 3-3 Schematic of Experimental Layout for the Micro-Coker ...........................................3-2
Figure 4-1 Variable Contact Time (Coker); Constant Contact Temperature: 225°C,
Constant Arc - Time = 6 hrs ..............................................................................................4-2
Figure 4-2 Variable Contact Temperature (Coker); Constant Contact Time: 24 hrs and
Constant Arc - Time: 6 hrs .................................................................................................4-2
Figure 4-3 Arrhenius Plot for Figure 4-2; Constant Arc and Contact (Coker) Time ...................4-3
Figure 4-4 Variable Arc Time; Constant Contact Time (Coker): 24 hrs and Constant
Contact Temperature: 225°C .............................................................................................4-3
Figure 4-5 Decreasing Precursor Concentrations of Filtered (0.8 µm) Oil which was
Arced for 6 hrs (Same Oil, Sequential Runs); Constant Contact Time/per run: 24 hrs
and Constant Contact Temperature: 225°C.......................................................................4-4
Figure 4-6 Conventional Oil Deposit .........................................................................................4-4
Figure 4-7 Synth Ester Oil Deposit ............................................................................................4-4
Figure 4-8 Depletion of Coke Precursors ....................................................................................4-5
Figure 4-9 Depletion of Coke Precursors...................................................................................4-5
Figure 4-10 Depletion of Coke Precursors.................................................................................4-5
Figure 4-11 Arc Time & Deposit Formation ...............................................................................4-5
Figure 4-16 Deposit on Hot Copper Surface..............................................................................4-6
Figure 4-17 Deposit on Hot Silver Surface ................................................................................4-6
Figure 4-18 Deposit of Neat Oil (225˚C) ....................................................................................4-7
Figure 4-19 Deposit of Neat Oil (200˚C) ....................................................................................4-7
Figure 4-20 Deposit of Neat Oil, Different Formulation (225˚C).................................................4-7
Figure 4-21 Propyne/Propane ratio vs contact time at 225˚C ....................................................4-8
Figure 4-22 Acetylene/Ethane ratio vs contact time at 225˚C....................................................4-8
Figure 4-23 Soot formation in the laboratory (1 liter of Voltesso-35; 91 W; 30.3 V, 1.14A) .......4-9
Figure 4-24 Soot formation in an LTC (Kent) ...........................................................................4-10
Figure 4-25 Thermo Gravimetric Analysis (DGA) of a typical deposit......................................4-13
xv
Figure 4-26 Plotting of weight loss vs temperature..................................................................4-13
Figure 4-27 FTIR – Infrared scan of deposit ............................................................................4-14
Figure 4-28 SEM/X-ray profile of deposit.................................................................................4-15
Figure 4-29...............................................................................................................................4-17
Figure 4-30 ASTM D1159 "Bromine Number" .........................................................................4-19
Figure 5-1 The Duval Triangle for Load Tap-Changer ...............................................................5-3
Figure 5-2 Duval Triangle Presentation of the Field – Case Study Kent Substation [22]
and Data from Reference [4]..............................................................................................5-5
Figure 5-3 Cartesian Presentation of the Field – Case Study Kent Substation [21] .................5-5
Figure 5-4 McLellan Substation; Predictive Maintenance "LTC in Fault Mode (●)"...................5-6
Figure 5-5 All Load Tap-Changers of BC Hydro's Fleet of LTCs ...............................................5-7
Figure 5-6 All Load Tap-Changers of BC Hydro's Fleet of LTCs ...............................................5-7
Figure 5-7 LTC Subset 1, One Make/Different Designs (BC Hydro) .........................................5-8
Figure 5-8 LTC Subset 1, One Make/Different Designs (BC Hydro) .........................................5-9
Figure 5-9 Subset 2, The Remaining Fleet of LTCs of about fifteen different Makes ................5-9
Figure 5-10 Subset 2, The Remaining Fleet of LTCs of about Fifteen Different Makes ..........5-10
Figure 5-11 The Field Case Study "With" and "Without Filtration" [15]....................................5-11
Figure 5-12 Pyrolysis of Transformer Oil as DGA (Volume Percent/Four Gases) ..................5-12
Figure 5-13 Edited Triangle displaying the Data from Reference [4] .......................................5-14
Figure 5-14 Comparison of Base-Ratio and Key Gases (for one half of the fleet)...................5-14
Figure 5-15 Comparison of Base-Ratio and Key Gases (for the rest of the fleet)....................5-15
Figure 5-16 Kennedy Substation (2003) Three separate tanks, gas composition A................5-16
Figure 5-17 Kennedy Substation (2003) Three separate tanks, gas composition B...............5-17
Figure 5-18 ANN T3M – Damaged Contacts ...........................................................................5-18
Figure 5-19 ANN T3M – Rotor with damaged Contact removed .............................................5-19
Figure 6-1 Calculated Time Dependences of the Contact Thickness δ and
Supertemperature Tsuper. ....................................................................................................6-6
Figure 6-2 Calculated Time Dependence of the Dissipated Power Φ........................................6-7
Figure 7-1 Thick layer of carbon covering all surfaces ..............................................................7-2
Figure 7-2 Carbon sludge at the bottom of the diverter tank .....................................................7-2
Figure 7-3 Arrow is pointing to sector cover bolt found on the bottom of the diverter tank ........7-3
Figure 7-4 Diverter switch removed from diverter tank ..............................................................7-3
Figure 7-5 Arrow show location of 4 of the 8 sector cover bolts ................................................7-4
Figure 7-6 Arrow on left showing sector cover bolt as found. Note locking tab around
bolt .....................................................................................................................................7-4
Figure 7-7 Minimal wear on main and arcing contacts, typical of other phases.........................7-5
Figure 7-8 Arrow pointing to broken potential lead as found. Red bar just below the
arrow head and to the left indicates break point of the lead...............................................7-5
xvi
Figure 7-9 Potential lead removed from diverter switch. Other end of the lead (not
shown) was recovered from its termination point. ..............................................................7-6
Figure 7-10 Rust on rim of diverter tank indicating water ingress. The sensing probe for
low temperature lockout protection is directly above this spot. ..........................................7-6
Figure 7-11 Water staining on the wall of the diverter tank........................................................7-7
Figure 8-1 LTC: Conceptual Model of Failure Modes [3] ...........................................................8-4
Figure 8-2 Gas-in-oil analysis (DGA) for LTC Unit T1 (in blue, linear) and Unit T2 ...................8-5
Figure 8-3 Rose-LTC Ratios of gas-in-oil for LTC Unit T1 (in blue, linear) and Unit T2.............8-6
Figure 8-4 General condition of the LTC on T1. ........................................................................8-7
Figure 8-5 General condition of T2 LTC. ...................................................................................8-8
Figure 8-6 Residual oil in T1 LTC tank. .....................................................................................8-8
Figure 8-7 Residual oil in T2 LTC tank. .....................................................................................8-9
Figure 8-8 General condition of the reversing switch contacts on T1 LTC. ...............................8-9
Figure 8-9 General condition of the reversing switch contacts on T2 LTC. .............................8-10
Figure 8-10 Another reversing switch contact on T2 LTC (No Filtration). ................................8-10
Figure 8-11 Carbon Deposit Reduction vs Amount of Polar Compounds Remaining in
the Treated Oil .................................................................................................................8-13
Figure 8-12 Carbon Deposit Reduction vs Color of Treated Oil ..............................................8-13
Figure 8-13 Schematic of a Comprehensive LTC Oil Treatment Capable of Removing
Carbon Particles as well as Deposit-forming Precursors .................................................8-14
Figure A-1 Thermo Gravimetric Analysis of Deposit (to 250˚C)............................................... A-1
Figure A-2 Thermo Gravimetric Analysis of Deposit (to 400˚C)............................................... A-2
Figure A-3 Effect of Arc Time on Volatiles (Set 1) ................................................................... A-2
Figure A-4 Effect of Arc Time on Volaties (Set 2) .................................................................... A-3
xvii
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1-1 Comparison of Fouling Models ..................................................................................1-3

Table 4-1 Effects of Variable Arc Times on Deposit Formation ...............................................4-11
Table 4-2 Elemental Composition of Hot Surface Deposits (from Micro-Coker)......................4-12
Table 4-3 Effects of Different Oil Additives on Deposit Reduction...........................................4-18
Table 5-1 Dissolved Gas-in-Oil ................................................................................................5-12
Table 5-2 Data .........................................................................................................................5-15
Table 5-3 ANN T3M in Severe Fault Mode [14,17]..................................................................5-18
Table 7-1 Dissolved Gas-in-Oil for McLelland (MLN) Tapchanger ............................................7-1
Table 8-1 Effect of Oil Treatment Using Different Adsorbents .................................................8-12
xix
1
OVERVIEW AND INTRODUCTION
Overview
Load tap changers (LTC) have been the subject of numerous fault investigations using visual
inspection [1,2,3,25,26] and the diagnostic tool of dissolved gas-in-oil analysis (DGA) [4]. Forty
percent of visual fault inspections [4] reveal the occurrence of coking, from light to severe. LTCs
that operate normally and are technically healthy are characterized by a combined hydrogen and
acetylene content (arc gases) that typically has a base ratio of 70% to 90% of the total
combustible gas content (TDCG) in parts per million [5].
As in-service LTCs age, they gradually move into a more thermal mode of operation due to wear
and tear. The arc gas content of hydrogen and acetylene (as a percent of the total dissolved
combustible gases, or TDCG) drops lower than that of new and well-maintained equipment.
With certain LTC makes and models, this gas content may drop to 40%, 5% or even less than 1%
as shown in Table V of Reference [4] and Figure 6-1 of Reference [5]; the latter being typical
when fault or failure modes have been reached.
If, under these conditions, the original charge of oil is still in the LTC, the concentrations of
compounds typical for "reverse refining" such as unsaturated volatiles (alkenes, alkynes and
mixed alkenes-alkynes), the concentrations of aromatic compounds (benzene, ethyl-benzene,
toluene, and xylenes "BTEX") and colloidal precursors will have increased significantly [6]. An
inspection under these circumstances might reveal severe sludge-related fouling accompanied by
coking. This state of affairs is either due to fault or age [1,5,6]. Resistive heating of thin films
might cause local hot spots [7].
Introduction
The large number of field and laboratory investigations concerning LTCs, permit a critical re-
assessment of the problem of coking, and the use of the diagnostic tool of dissolved gas-in-oil
analysis (DGA). Software interpretation of DGA-data is replacing manual interpretation as better
algorithms for the monitoring of load tap-changers become available.
The problem of coking is not restricted to electrical utilities only. Historically, similar events
have plagued the gas and oil industry. There are commonalities between these two industries. For
one, both industries encounter the problem of coking in dealing with mineral-based fluids.
Secondly, coking is encountered as a result of thermal interactions. While utilities encounter the
problem of coking with transformer oil, a finished product, the oil and gas industry encounters
coking during the processing of crude oil (and natural gas), which are feedstock(s) for product
lines, including transformer oils.
1-1
Overview and Introduction
Dissolved gas-in-oil analysis is used as a diagnostic tool for determining the health of
transformers and electrical cables by probing the state of their liquid and solid insulation. Over
the last few years, DGA is being used more and more to diagnose load tap-changers and other
oil-immersed switchgear (Youngblood, Duval, Haupert, Jakob and others).
In the case of load tap-changers there may also be a relationship between coking events and
DGA data. The purpose of diagnostics in this case would be to recognize the onset of thermal
fault modes and possible coke formation. These will occur when sludge begins to deposit on
switch assemblies and interferes with heat transfer, which in turn increases resistive heating
followed by a promotion of coking. Old or low quality recycled transformer oils that have
degraded beyond minimum requirements might bring about the same end results.
Coking is an advanced form of fouling commonly encountered in the refining of petroleum

products. It is defined as "the formation of highly carbonized deposits on heat transfer surfaces
that resist transfer of heat to the bulk liquid and add to the overall thermal resistance of heat
transfer". In the case of the utility industry and load tap-changers, coking also interferes with the
design conductance of oil-immersed electrical switch assemblies. Engineers frequently express
fouling as a heat transfer property with the dimensions of [m2K/W]. For temperatures <50˚C,
transformer oil typically has a value of 0.00018, hydrogen has a value of 0.00176, and seawater
or distilled water has a value of about 0.00009. Average river water, in contrast to distilled
water, has an average value of 0.00053. These differences are mathematically significant when
calculating heat transfer data and the related electrical conductance.
There are five parameters that can affect fouling and heat transfer [8], [9] and [10]:
• Surface-active, metal-catalyzed coking mechanism – active metal sites that promote
dehydrogenation, creating a highly carbonized deposit.
• Thermal decomposition – in the bulk fluid or in the boundary layer, usually after the initial
evaporation of lighter hydrocarbon fractions (petroleum industry).
• Sedimentation or diffusion of fouling species – within a boundary layer toward a polar metal
surface.
• Precipitation – of heavier organic compounds as, in the case discussed here, transformer
fluid comes in contact with hot surfaces and solvency changes because of evaporation.
• Chemical reaction between fluid species – residues can agglomerate and create insoluble
materials that may adhere to conductor surfaces or settle in low-velocity zones
The first two parameters affect the primary mechanism of coking, while the last three relate to
the transport of the fouling species from the oil to the hot surface.
The rate of fouling (Rf) can be defined as the difference between the rate of deposition (fd) and
the rate of removal (fr):
R f = fd − fr Equation 1-1
(For fr approaching fd, the rate of fouling approaches zero.)
1-2
Overview and Introduction
A rate of removal appears to be non-existent in the case of load tap-changers in contrast to the
fouling of boiler tubes in the petroleum industry. Perhaps, by changing the solvency of hot
transformer oil (synthetic fluids, detergent-additives...), this could be changed, in the future.
Thermal resistance due to coking can be defined as a ratio of fouling thickness to effective
thermal conductivity (and associated electrical conductivity) due to the formation of a coke layer.
There are many different coking mechanisms. It is important to determine by observation, which
mechanism prevails. Mathematical modeling of the process of fouling is an important task that
involves:
• Observations to determine the specific fouling mechanism(s).
• The collection of data for specific parameters, which express their effect upon fouling.
• The selection of the proper coking model.
A few of the classical fouling models are listed in Table 1-1 [9]. The coking-up of switch
assemblies such as reversing switches, diverter switches and/or selector switches will interfere
with the OEM design specifications for wear, heat transfer and electrical conductivity in a given
LTC. It should be possible to apply existing laboratory and/or field observations to the existing
fouling models and either modify one or assemble a new model for load tap-changers.
Heat Transfer Research, Inc. (HTRI), an international consortium founded in 1962, initiated a
Global Fouling Research Program during the late 1990s [10].
Table 1-1
Comparison of Fouling Models
Model Deposition Term d

Removal Term r Characteristics of
Fouling Type
Kern and Seaton Proportional to Proportional to fouling Sedimentation; however,

concentration of foulant layer thickness and similar trends are seen with
shear stress other types
Watkinson and Proportional to Used the same as Kern Reaction rate controlled or
Epstein concentration difference and Seaton diffusion rate controlled.
and to Arrhenius (The two mechanisms were
temperature function combined in an attempt to
fit both decomposition and
sedimentation data.)
Reitzer Proportional to super- None Combination of dust from

saturation to the nth gas. However, neglecting
power removal makes model
questionable for high
velocity and loose material
1-3
2
BACKGROUND AND PREVIOUS FINDINGS
Background
Virtually every statistical analysis and study done on transformer outages and failures, lists
LTCs, as a major cause of such incidents. Over the last few years, in predictive maintenance,
DGA is being used more and more to diagnose load tap-changers and other oil-immersed
switchgear.
B.C. Hydro conducted evaluations of various commercial LTC filtration systems. In most cases,
it was found that the on-line filtration systems were very effective at removing carbon particles
(particulates or soot). Consequentially it required a lot less time for the inspection/overhauling
and cleaning of the tap changers.
Powertech Labs Inc. joined B.C. Hydro in a field-case study, which attempted to determine and
quantify the effectiveness of on-line filtration by comparing the conditions of two identical
LTCs, one installed with a filtration system and one without. The study was carried out for about
five years under the same initial starting and operating conditions. The study addressed the
removal of particulates only, but not the removal of dissolved sludge/coke precursors, which is
one of the tasks for the present study.
Previously Reported Findings
Aside from mechanical or electrical failure of load tap-changers, Powertech addressed some of
the issues in the following EPRI- funded work:
1. Several investigators addressed the formation of sludge resulting from the normal operation
(arcing) of load tap-changers and its removal. Conventional, commercially available on-line
filtration proves to be very effective (DOBLE 2002: "Successful Application of Filtration
System on On-Load Tap Changers – A Case Study").
2. Investigations by Powertech dealt with the obvious cause under 1.(DOBLE 2002), and
reasoned that it is desirable to detect incipient coking by dissolved gas-in-oil analysis (Duval
Triangle). (DOBLE 2003: "A Critical Assessment of Fouling and Coking of Load Tap
Changers").
2-1
Background and Previous Findings
3. A study on the coking of reversing switch assemblies (HOLM 2002, and EPRI 1002050:
"Evaluation of Materials for LTC Contacts").
4. Coking as a result of the accumulation of transformer oil soluble coking precursors was
documented and reported (EPRI 1006654: "Diagnostics, Contact Coking, and On-Line
Filtration", and EPRI 1001775: "Load Tap Changer Oil Quality Analysis, Lessons
Learned").
Currently available, commercial on-line filtration units remove particulates in LTCs, but to our
knowledge, they do not address the removal of soluble coking-precursors.
2-2
3
EXPERIMENTAL
The experimental approach was guided by the findings described in EPRI Technical Report
1006654:"Diagnostics, Contact Coking, and On-Line Filtration", prepared by Powertech Labs
Inc. The report stated that transformer oils in load tap-changer undergo a change in oil quality
that is unique for this type of oil-immersed switchgear, which sets them apart from transformers.
The term reverse refining was coined.
Arc Stress
Experimentally, one liter of each sample was subjected, at ambient conditions, to continuous
arcing for 6 hours. The setup, which is the same as described in the earlier EPRI study [6], is
shown in Figure 3-1 and Figure 3-2.
120V 58V V&I

VARIAC
MEASUREMENT
115V
15000V
Transformer Oil
Figure 3-1
Schematic of Arcing Setup
3-1
Experimental
It was estimated that 6 hours of arc-stress would produce concentrations of unsaturated

hydrocarbons at 5 times higher levels than those generated in an average and normally-operating
LTC over five years of operation (100,000 switch operations). This estimate was based on the
B.C. Hydro voltage regulator at Kent substation, Case Study 1998 to 1999* [5].
Figure 3-2
Arcing Apparatus
Drierite Filled Breather
Stainless Steel Lines
Mechanical
Press
Reservoir
1 Liter
(Voltesso, Dried
Specifications
O - Ring
Incoloy Cartridge
Heater: 200W
Test
Coupon
Timer & Thermocouple

Clock
Micro-pump
(Speed Adjustable)
Temperature ± 0.2°
and Heater Control
Figure 3-3
Schematic of Experimental Layout for the Micro-Coker
*
Load: 100A (LTC rated for 300A)
3-2
Experimental
Deposit Formation
Figure 3-3:
The oil passes across the specimen (area = 1.2 cm2) in a radial flow pattern, from the periphery to
the centre at a film thickness of 1.6 mm. The rate of flow is about 3 cm3/minute. The specimen
(test coupon) has a thickness of 3.4 mm; and the surface temperature facing the oil flow is
regulated within ±0.2˚C final temperature, for example 225˚. This is achieved with the aid of a
thermocouple embedded within 1.5 mm of the surface, smart control and a heat source (cartridge
heater) of 200 watts within 3.5 mm of the surface.
3-3
4
FINDINGS
Deposit Formation
Deposit formation was extensively studied in the laboratory. Stresses were applied to match load
tap-changers performing between normal-, fault- and failure modes of operation. The resulting
data were compared with and complemented by those from the field.
Some of the data were obtained from the LTC database at Powertech, but most were derived
from field case studies at B.C. Hydro's substations of Kent and Mission. These BC Hydro co-
sponsored case studies were completed between 1997 and 2002. The relevant, comparative study
at Mission lasted five years, consisted of two identical load tap-changer/transformer set-ups, one
unit with, one without in-line filtration, and assessed the possible contribution of in-line filtration
to LTC maintenance and oil quality [6,15].
Coke Formation: Field Data And Laboratory Results
Equipment has been developed [5,6,23] to study the formation of surface coke deposits and the
conditions that promote their formation. The test conditions can be easily controlled, allowing
various materials and test parameters to be studied, such as:
• Catalytic effects of metals
• Additive effects
• Contact temperature of surface (hotspots)
• Contact time (with hotspot)
• Thermal pre-stress
• Arc pre-stress
• Combined thermal + arc pre-stress (etc)
Coke formed in the laboratory at Powertech appears equivalent to coke formed in the field, based
on analytical data obtained from Fourier Transform Infrared and elemental analysis. Details of
the coke "fine structure" may and will be different [18].
4-1
Findings
Deposit Formation: Pictorial -, Qualitative - and Quantitative Records
The laboratory experiments used the setup of Figure 3-3 to evaluate the contributions that time,
temperature, and arc-stress have on the rate of coke formation [6]. While time and temperature
are self explanatory, arc stress refers to the amount of arcing that the oil has been subjected to.
Test oils were subjected to arc stress with a laboratory arcing device (Figures 3-1 and 3-2), with
time as a variable. Essentially the device provides a steady electric arc across electrodes that are
immersed in the insulating oil sample. The power transmitted through the arc is approximately
90 watts.
Simple Quantitative Relationships: Figures 4-1 to 4-5

Deposit Formation with Time at 225°C
8.0
7.0
6.0
Deposit Formed milligrams
5.0
4.0
3.0
2.0
1.0
0.0
0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0
Hours in Coker
Figure 4-1
Variable Contact Time (Coker); Constant Contact Temperature: 225°C, Constant Arc -
Time = 6 hrs
DEPOSIT FORMATION versus TEMPERATURE
16.0
14.0
12.0
DEPOSIT: [mg/sqcm]
10.0
8.0
6.0
4.0
2.0
0.0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
TEMPERATURE: [Celsius]
Figure 4-2
Variable Contact Temperature (Coker); Constant Contact Time: 24 hrs and Constant Arc -
Time: 6 hrs
4-2
Findings
ARRHENIUS PLOT: Ln [Amount of Deposit/sqcm] versus [1000*(1/T)]
2.5
2
Logarithm [Ln(mg/sqcm)]
1.5
0.5
0
1.70 1.90 2.10 2.30 2.50 2.70
-0.5
-1
-1.5
[1000*(1/T)]
Figure 4-3
Arrhenius Plot for Figure 4-2; Constant Arc and Contact (Coker) Time
DEPOSIT FORMATION vs. ARC TIME
2.5
2.0
DEPOSIT: [mg/sqcm]
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0
ARC TIME: [hrs]
Figure 4-4
Variable Arc Time; Constant Contact Time (Coker): 24 hrs and Constant Contact
Temperature: 225°C
4-3
Findings
DEPLETION OF DEPOSIT PRECURSORS

CIRCULATION OF OIL OVER HOT COPPER SURFACE (225°C)
4.0
SAME OIL: THREE SEQUENTIAL RUNS WITH 3 INDIVIDUAL COUPONS

3.5
DEPOSIT: [mg/sqcm]
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
0 1 2 3 4
RUN NUMBER
Figure 4-5
Decreasing Precursor Concentrations of Filtered (0.8 µm) Oil which was Arced for 6 hrs
(Same Oil, Sequential Runs); Constant Contact Time/per run: 24 hrs and Constant Contact
Temperature: 225°C
Pictorial Records
Figure 4-6 Figure 4-7

Conventional Oil Deposit Synth Ester Oil Deposit
RUN #1 RUN #2
"Mineral Oil" "Synthetic Ester Oil"
N2 – purged headspace N2 – purged headspace
Arced: 6 hours, filtered* Arced: 6 hours, filtered*
Surface temperature 225˚C Surface temperature: 225˚C
Oil circulation: 24 hours Oil circulation: 24 hours
Weight of deposit: 1.7 mg Weight of deposit: 1.6 mg
( = 1.20 [mg/cm2] ( = 1.13 [mg/cm2])
*) = 0.8 µm millipore *) 0.8 µm millipore
4-4
Findings
More detail on the formation of deposits and its effects on oil quality may be found in EPRI
Report: 1001775 "Load Tap Changer Oil Quality Analysis, Lessons Learned" (October 2002).
The chemical composition of the transformer oil appears to effect sludge deposition on polar
surfaces, dense in the case of an ester-oil.
Figure 4-8 Figure 4-9 Figure 4-10

Depletion of Coke Precursors Depletion of Coke Precursors Depletion of Coke Precursors
RUN #3 RUN #4 RUN #5

Weight: 4.7 mg Weight: 3.1 mg Weight: 1.8 mg
Figures 4-8 to 4-10: Depletion of Deposit Precursors in one and the same arced oil during
consecutive runs over separate Cu – coupons utilizing the micro-coker (Oil: Voltesso-35; Total
arc time = 6 hours hot surface temperature: 225˚C; circulation time: 24 hours). See Figure 4-5.
Figure 4-11 Figure 4-12 Figure 4-13

Arc Time & Deposit Arc Time & Deposit Arc Time & Deposit
Formation Formation Formation
RUN #6 RUN #7 RUN #8

Arc: 0 hours; weight: 0.8 mg* Arc: 1.0 hours, weight: 0.8 mg Arc: 2.0 hours; weight: 1.0 mg
*
Net weight of individual deposits
4-5
Findings

Arc Time & Deposit Formation Arc Time & Deposit Formation
RUN #9 RUN #10

Arc: 4.0 hours; weight: 1.8 mg Arc: 6.0 hours; weight: 3.7 mg
Figures 4-11 to 4-15: Build-up of Deposit Precursors as a function of Arc Duration. Deposits
result from runs of the oil over hot surfaces of Cu coupons in the microcoker (5 oil samples of
Voltesso-35; 5 Arc times = 0 to 6 hours; hot surface temperature: 225˚C; circulation time: 24
hours). See Figure 4-4.

Deposit on Hot Copper Surface Deposit on Hot Silver Surface
RUN #11 RUN #12

Copper Coupon Silver Coupon
kWeight of deposit: 7.5 mg Weoght of deposit: 6.1 mg
4-6
Findings
Figures 4-16 and 4-17: Deposit Formation on Different Metal Surfaces: Run #11 "Copper", Run
#12 "Silver" (Oil: Voltesso-35, two batches with arc times = 6 hours/each; hot surface
temperature: 225˚C; circulation time: 24 hours)
Comment:
Although there are quantitative differences between RUN #11 and RUN #12, they are
fundamentally the same. Arc-stressed transformer oils form deposits on "hot metal surfaces".

Deposit of Neat Oil (225˚C) Deposit of Neat Oil (200˚C)
RUN #13 RUN #14:

Old Batch: 225˚C, 24 hours Old Batch: 200˚C, 24 hours
Figure 4-20
Deposit of Neat Oil, Different Formulation (225˚C)
RUN #15
New Batch: 225˚C, 24 hours
Figures 4-18 to 4-20 : Deposit Formation as a Function of Oil Formulation. Two differently
formulated batches of Voltesso-35. (Batch RUN #15 only with Cu - deactivator; hot surface
temperature: 225˚C; circulation time: 24 hours)
Comment: The deposits differ from those of arced oil, RUN #13 and RUN #14 are "flaky and
non-adherent"
4-7
Findings
Gaseous Deposit Precursors: Possible Participation of Simple Triple Bond

Compounds
Electric arcing forms a range of compounds, which contain double and triple bonds.
Propyne to Propane Ratio vs. Coking Time

[Area Counts / Area Counts]
1.08
1.06
1.04
Propyne / Propane:
1.02
1.00
0.98
0.96
0.94
0.92
0 5 10 15 20 25
Hours on Coker at 225°C
Figure 4-21
Propyne/Propane ratio vs contact time at 225˚C
Acetylene to Ethane Ratio vs. Coking Time

[Area Counts / Area Counts]
1.28
1.26
1.24
Acetylene / Ethane:
1.22
1.20
1.18
1.16
1.14
1.12
0 5 10 15 20 25
Hours in Coker: Contact Surface at 225°C
Figure 4-22
Acetylene/Ethane ratio vs contact time at 225˚C
4-8
Findings
Acetylene and propyne are the simplest compounds with triple bonds. An experiment was
conducted to determine if these compounds are precursors to deposit formation. The contact-
coker was run with new oil, which was spiked with acetylene and ethane in one case, and
proylene and propane in the other case. Samples of oil were taken over a 24-hour sampling
period and the amounts of acetylene and ethane, propylene and propane were determined and
compared. Figure 4-21 shows that more acetylene was consumed relative to the non-reactive
ethane. This would indicate that the acetylene had reacted to form other compounds that may
lead for example to deposit formation. The experiment was repeated with propyne and propane
(Figure 4-21) with similar results.
Solid and Soluble Precursors for Deposits: Soot Formation
TRANSFORMER OIL Voltesso-35:

SOOT FORMATION DUE TO ELECTRICAL DISCHARGE (ARCING)
700
(dy/dx) = 2.48
600
CONCENTRATION: [mg/L]
500
400
300 (dy/dx) = 1.98
200
(dy/dx) = 1.48
100
(dy/dx) = 0.93 R2 = 1
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400
TIME: [minutes]
Figure 4-23
Soot formation in the laboratory (1 liter of Voltesso-35; 91 W; 30.3 V, 1.14A)
The switch-operations of oil immersed switchgear produce, as a result of arcing, a plethora of

chemical compounds: saturated and unsaturated hydrocarbons, aromatic and poly-aromatic
hydrocarbons, hydrogen, oxides of carbon; and aside from these soot is formed. The formation of
colloidal dispersions, composed of high molecular weight deposit precursors, has to be assumed.
The data for Figure 4-23 appear to indicate that arcing results not only in the direct formation of
soot but also in the formation of soot precursors, which would explain the increase of the first
derivative (dy/dx) with time. Any kinetic expression for the formation of soot would have to
incorporate a rate expression, in which the precursor concentration is accounted for, all other
parameters being equal. Soot data from Kent substation support these findings (Figure 4-24).
4-9
Findings
SOOT FORMATION IN AN LTC AS A RESULT OF ARCING:

KENT SUBSTATION: TRANSFORMER OIL: VOLTESSO-35
70
60
50
SOOT: [mg/L]
40
30
20
10
y = 3E-09x2 + 0.0005x + 1.90
0
0 10000 20000 30000 40000 50000 60000 70000 80000 90000
NUMBER OF SWITCH OPERATIONS
Figure 4-24
Soot formation in an LTC (Kent)
Carbonized transformer oils show with rising numbers of impulse pre-stresses a significant
reduction of the breakdown strength and with a mounting degree of carbonization the maximum
of the breakdown voltage curves is shifted from 80˚C to lower temperatures [28].
Hot Surface Deposits
Oil Composition
This report investigates aspects of oil and sludge composition different from those presented
previously [6].
• The effect of arcing on deposit formation has been summarized in Table 4-1 together with
the concentrations of the dissolved gases and volatiles. All data are for transformer oils after
passing the Contact Coker.
The initial concentrations after arcing but prior to the Contact Coker were not available.
4-10
Findings
Table 4-1
Effects of Variable Arc Times on Deposit Formation
Contact Time: 24hrs and Contact Temperature: 225˚C

Arced Arced Arced Arced
Sample Information
1 Hour 2 Hours 4 Hours 6 Hours
Milligrams of deposit formed in contact coker 0.8 1.0 1.8 3.7
Gas Content (% v/v) 59.9 64.8 65.0 65.1
Compound (ppm v/v)
Hydrogen H2 13 61 19 26
Oxygen 02 81000 80800 80500 80500
Nitrogen N2 501000 499000 494000 493000
Carbon monoxide CO 14 51 34 30
Methane CH4 118 745 500 330
Carbon dioxide C02 1240 1170 1000 1160
Acetylene C2H2 12400 60000 67800 70000
Ethylene C2H4 1500 5300 5400 5600
Ethane C2H6 520 1070 940 870
Compound (PPM by wt.)
Propane <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0.1
Propadiene 0.54 1.2 2.1 2.5
Propene 1.2 2.9 4.7 5.7
Butane <0.1 <0.1 0.2 0.3
Propyne 1.3 3.0 5.0 5.9
1-Butene 0.27 0.59 1.0 1.2
1,3 Butadiene 1.3 2.5 4.4 5.9
1,3 Butadiyne 120 240 450 520
Methyl Propene 0.30 1.1 1.6 2.0
Pentane <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0.8
1-Butene-3-yne 14 30 58 69
1,3 Pentadiene 0.37 0.66 1.5 1.7
Unknown 5.8 12 24 31
Benzene 12 20 38 45
Toluene 8.1 10 15 20
Ethyl Benzene 2.2 2.4 2.9 4.2
Styrene <1 1.6 3.1 4.2
Ethynyl Benzene 5.7 12 26 33
MandP-Xylene 5.7 4.0 4.5 6.2
O-Xylene 3.7 <1 <1 2.6
4-11
Findings
The elemental composition of sludge had been studied, and it was found that laboratory samples
were similar to samples formed under field conditions [5,6] and Table 4-2. A recent change in
the formulation of transformer oil (Voltesso-35) made it advisable to re-examine the composition
of laboratory-generated deposits
• The new data are reported in Table 4-2.
Elemental Composition
The [H/C] – ratio compares favorably with the old data set [1D]. Sediments of transformer oil
and certain middle distillate fuels are similar. Transformer oil as well as middle distillate fuel
are derived from petroleum fractions of comparable boiling range. The mechanism for the
formation of sludge and deposits ("gum") in middle distillate fuels has been under investigation
for many years due to the interest by the armed forces, utilities, and other groups. Typical
problems are: the plugging of fuel filter and the failure of fuel injector nozzles due to fuel
deposits [30].
Table 4-2
Elemental Composition of Hot Surface Deposits (from Micro-Coker)
C H N O S [H/C]*
Deposit: Elemental Composition
% % % % % Ratio
New Data for Voltesso-35:
Different batch of oil, compare to deposit: 1D deposit 74.9 4.7 0.7 18.2 0.8 0.75
OLD DATA:
Oil & Deposit- [H/C]*
C H N O S
Composition Ratio)
Elemental
Composit % 86.9 12.8 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 1.77
[1A:Oil]*
Elemental
Composit % 72.4 4.5 1.6 22 0.5 0.74
[1D: Deposit]*
Elemental
Composit % 86.1 14.4 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 2.00
[6A: Oil]*
Elemental
Composit % 75.0 6.7 0.1 ~18 0.4 1.00
[6D: Deposit]*
*The hydrogen to carbon ratio is an "atomic ratio": [Number of moles of hydrogen/number of moles of carbon];
reference: [6]; Samples 6A and 6D were derived from a highly hydro-treated paraffinic transformer oil
4-12
Findings
Pyrolysis and Weight Loss
A typical soot deposit (laboratory samples) was pyrolyzed by thermo-gravimetric analysis

(DGA). The sample is heated in a temperature-controlled atmosphere of nitrogen purge gas,
while its loss in weight is recorded.
One of these DGA runs is shown in Figure 4-25 and a graph of temperature versus weight loss
for all four runs in Figure 4-26. The DGA runs for 250˚C and 400˚C are in the Appendix.
Figure 4-25
Thermo Gravimetric Analysis (DGA) of a typical deposit
TGA - Weight Loss vs. Temperature (in Nitrogen)
120
100
WEIGHT LOSS: [Wt.%]
80
60
40
20
0
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200
TEMPERATURE: [deg. Celsius]
Figure 4-26
Plotting of weight loss vs temperature
4-13
Findings
Only a small percentage of the sample volatilizes (perhaps oil inclusions) before reaching a
temperature of 325˚C, while most of the sample is pyrolyzed between 325˚C and 975˚C.
Perhaps, some of the sample de-polymerizes in this temperature range into smaller, volatile
subunits.
Infrared Scan of Hot Surface Deposit (Laboratory)
The presence of –OH, C=O and C-O-C groups is typical for oxidized mineral oils.
• A typical infrared scan, Figure 4-27, is indicative for the presence of these functional groups
in the deposit
Figure 4-27
FTIR – Infrared scan of deposit
4-14
Findings
Elemental Profile of Deposit by SEM/X-Ray
Similar to the deposit of a diverter switch contact [Reference 5, Figure 4-24] the presence of
sulfur is typical for laboratory-generated transformer oil deposits.
• The profile resulting from the X-ray option of the scanning electron microscope Figure 4-28
underlines again the significance of sulfur in the formation of surface deposits.
Figure 4-28
SEM/X-ray profile of deposit
4-15
Findings
Similar to other middle distillates, oxidation products and sulfur compounds play an important
role in the formation of deposits, while the presence of unsaturated compounds appear to
facilitate their formation significantly (Table 4-1) [6] and soluble copper catalyzes (accelerates)
the process [30].
The Case of the Resting Reversing Switch Assembly
Mechanically stationary copper and brass reversing switch assemblies, but not silver and/or
silver coated switch assemblies, are affected by current cycling. The effect on the contact
surfaces as the "cumulative voltage drops" are significant.. This so-called "burning-in" of copper
contacts suggests the formation of thin films. Localized "super-temperatures" are
suspected [7,18]. Copper appears to promote this process.
Experimental data on new transformer oil and new resting reversing switch assemblies, lead to
the conclusion that surface changes on the contacts will be more significant for LTCs operating
under full load. The transformer oil in such an LTC will suffer reverse-refining resulting from
the making and breaking of contacts by selector and diverter switches [5,6]. The chemical
compounds formed will react much more readily with catalytically active metal surfaces [7]. The
burning-in should constitute a much more serious problem in the field than the laboratory tests
suggest. The advice to run reversing switch assemblies through positions above and below
neutral for several times is well founded.
Electrical Discharge (arcing) and Reverse Refining
The arcing of oil-immersed switchgear, which results from contact breaking and making, leads to
reverse refining of the insulating oil [5]. The accompanying chemical transformations surpass the
complexity of oil ageing in transformers, unless the transformer enters a failure mode. These
materials accumulate in proportion to the electrical energy input. As a result, some of the
compounds formed may be used to estimate the number of tap-change operations. An example is
the unsaturated volatile 1,3-butadiyne, which is shown in Figure 4-29.
4-16
Findings
FORMATION (LABORATORY) OF:

1, 3 - Butadiyne as a function of "ARC - TIME"
2000
1800
1600
CONCENTRATION: [mg/Kg]
1400
1200
1000
800
600 y = -0.0039x2 + 6.3936x - 18.065

R2 = 0.996
400
200
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400
ARC - TIME: [minutes]
Figure 4-29
Recent laboratory findings [22] addressed the overheating of reversing switch assemblies [7] and
a mechanism for the deposition of sludge precursors on copper surfaces [6]. The deposition
process of arcing compounds (reverse refining) follows first order kinetics. The temperature
dependence of the deposition rate is described by the Arrhenius equation.
From recent experimental and field work:

• Sludge precursors accumulate with the first tap-change operation, as a result of electrical
discharges during the making and breaking of contacts [5] (Figure 5-3).
• Fouling (thickness of deposit) is proportional to the concentration of the precursors
(Figure 4-5).
• Fouling is a function of time (Figure 4-1).
• Fouling follows the Arrhenius (temperature) law (Figures 4-2, 4-3)
• Fouling will result in poorer heat transfer characteristics and poorer electrical conductance,
the two deteriorating transport phenomena enhancing each other [5] (Figures 6-1 and 6-2).
• Most LTC switching surfaces will foul-up. They will first be covered by a surface film and
then by a dark deposit. Depending on surface temperature and time, coking
(dehydrogenation) will result (Figure 8-10).
• Equipment will eventually move out of the range of its design specifications, and might enter
a fault mode of operation and possible failure if not detected in time (Table 7-1, Figures 7-1
and 7-2).
4-17
Findings
The deposition of sludge (dry) and coke, as suggested by laboratory and field data, appears to
follow a mechanism best described by the following relationship:
Deposit Thickness • Function (concentration of precursors, surface temperature, arc time, contact
time, catalyst) Equation 4-1
Arc time in the laboratory is equivalent to the number of switch-operations in the field. The
catalyst is usually copper.
Reduction of Deposit Formation – Using Additives
Oil soluble additives1 were selected and spiked into arced oil. The spiked oil was run in the
contact coker to determine if less deposit was formed as a result of the additive.
Table 4-3
Effects of Different Oil Additives on Deposit Reduction
Name of Concentr. Deposit [mg] Deposit Reduction1 Comments

Additive11 Level [%wt] [%wt]
No Additive 4.7 - Base Line Run
Tolyl Triazole 0.01 5.4 Nil Metal deactivator
DBPC 1 4.8 Nil Di-tertiary-butyl-para-cresol
antioxidant
Irganox L-06 0.1 5.0 Nil Octylated phenyl naphthylamine
antioxidant (Ciba)
Octel A022 0.1 4.6 2 Butylphenylenediamine antioxidant
(Octel)
Primene 81R 0.1 4.4 6 C12-C14 isomeric aliphatic amines
antioxidant (Rohm and Haas)
Irgamet 38S 0.1 5.2 Nil Benzotriazole alkyl amines metal
deactivator (Ciba)
Irganox L57 0.1 4.9 Nil Octylated/butylated diphenylamine
antioxidant (Ciba)
Primene JMT 0.1 4.2 11 C16-C22 isomeric aliphatic amines
antioxidant (Rohm and Haas)
Diphenyl Amine 0.1 5.3 Nil Amine antioxidant
Notes:
% Reduction =[((mg deposit from baseline run – mg of deposit from adsorbent treated oil)/( mg deposit from
baseline run))*100]
% Reduction = [((4.7 – mg from run)/4.7)*100]
1
Reference: Cartlidge, D.M., "Life Extension of Transformers by In-Situ Restoration of Additives", Powertech Labs
project 9098-43-03, December 2002
4-18
Findings
Bromine Number
The bromine number, ASTM D1159, is a laboratory test method for determining the degree of
un-saturation of a petroleum product. The method was evaluated for its usefulness as a quick and
easy method for measuring the relative stability of oils, which have been subjected to an electric
arc in a manner that is typical for LTCs. The method is very sensitive to double bonds in
aliphatic compounds. Arcing of insulating oil causes the hydrocarbon compounds to degrade and
form unsaturated hydrocarbons including acetylene, propyne, etc, along with carbon (soot).
Figure 4-30 shows the typical bromine number titration curve, in this case for a calibration
standard containing the unsaturated compound cyclohexene. The titration proceeds with an
instrument reading, which is greater than 600 millivolts (mV) until about 3 milliliters of bromate
reagent has been added. At this point the millivolt reading drops rapidly with the addition of
more bromate solution indicating that all of the double bonds in the standard have reacted with
the bromate. The endpoint of the reaction is the inflection point of the curve (~ 400 mV). For
field samples: the more bromate solution is required to reach the endpoint, the higher the amount
of unsaturated compounds in the sample.
Bromine No. ASTM D1159 for Cyclohexene Standard
700
600
500
400
Millivolts
300
200
100
0
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0
Milliliters of Bromate
Figure 4-30
ASTM D1159 "Bromine Number"
While the method is sensitive to double bonds of the olefinic type, the titrations of real samples
proved to be irreproducible, and exhibited low Bromine Numbers. Powertech Labs Inc. suspects
that the complexity of the sample matrices (reverse refined) results in a large number of side
reactions and cannot be assessed by this method.
4-19
5
DISSOLVED GAS-IN-OIL DATA (DGA), SLUDGE
FORMATION AND COKING
Laboratory Results and LTC Field Data
A recent feature article by M. Duval [4] published in the IEEE Electrical Insulation Magazine
(IEC Publication 60599), reviewed faults in transformers, including load tap-changers. The
author used a graphical evaluation [11] where the three sides of a triangle are occupied by
methane, ethylene and acetylene, while areas within the triangle are subdivided into zones of
arcing, partial discharge and thermal conditions. The outcome is seven distinct regions of
diagnostic values identified as D1, D2, DT, T3, T2, T1 and PD, depending on the amount of
methane, ethylene and acetylene present.
With two exceptions, the 15 severely coked load tap-changers [4] as studied in the paper fell into
the region T3, with temperatures higher than 700˚C. This region T3 is characterized by a
marginal acetylene content.
This triangle method presents, in a simplified single-point form, "the DGA of an LTC and the
associated temperature regime". The triangle is limited in that it ignores the contributions of
other fault gases, but recently available diagnostic software uses algorithms, artificial
intelligence and comprehensive equipment databases to analyze the health of load tap-
changers [12]. Powertech Labs Inc. has designed "Vector" and co-designed two of these
powerful software packages.
In the near future, when on-line monitoring of DGA in LTCs is available, the Triangle may
become less useful, although – it is likely that it will still be helpful for demonstrating trends that
1
indicate the formation of sludge and coke.
In this report Powertech Labs used the method for the demonstration of eight scenarios:
1. Introduction of the Triangle (Figure 5-1), presentation of arc gas composition and
temperature markers as derived from laboratory and field data [4,5,13].
2. Presentation of a field case study (Figures 5-2 and 5-3: Kent Substation) [5,13], together with
additional information from reference material [4].
1
Where not stated otherwise, the data were derived from experiments co-sponsored by EPRI and BC Hydro
beginning in 1997 and continuing up to the present time.
5-1
Dissolved Gas-in-Oil Data (DGA), Sludge Formation and Coking
3. The DGA fingerprint for two load tap-changers (Figure 5-4) that are sister units in design and
maintenance. One unit operates normally, while the other unit operates in a fault mode. A
field report is included (Section 7).
4. A survey of 350 individual load tap-changers (BC Hydro: Figures 5-5 and 5-6) [14].
5. Presentation of the same data as two subsets:

– One set consisting of 120 units of one make (Figures 5-7 and 5-8), but different
designs and age.
– A second set consisting of the remaining 230 LTCs, representing about 15 different
makes (Figures 5-9 and 5-10).
6. The effects of filtration (BC Hydro: Figure 5-11 and Section 8, Part 1) [15].
7. Presentation of data [4] in a modified Triangle (Figure 5-13) by including the fault gases
ethane and hydrogen in the presentation.
8. Data for a three phase (three separate oil compartments) LTC at Kennedy Substation (Table
5-2, Figures 5-16 and 5-17).
The interpretation of LTC data by the Triangle is not intended to replace sophisticated software
tools. Powertech Labs Inc has edited the temperatures in the original Triangle using their own
experimental data. The resulting temperature scale deviates from the one provided [4].
Powertech's data are the result of the partial pyrolysis and follow-up DGA of transformer oil at
temperatures between 100˚C and 800˚C. This temperature scale was derived by different
experimental means than those for reference [4], and therefore the data should not be quoted
without proper reference. As with ASTM tests, contact times, furnace material and design all
affect the partial pyrolysis of transformer oil [5].
The ethylene side of the Triangle (Figure 5-1) shows a leap in gas composition between 500˚C
and 550˚C. At about 500˚C, the partial pyrolysis of mineral oil enters a new kinetic domain
characterized by a high degree of free radical scavenging activity. In this particular domain, the
2
formation of gases and other chemical compounds accelerates by an order of magnitude
(Table 5-1, Figure 5-12, page 5-12); and from the field (Table 5-3 page 5-18). The published
literature provides an example for the formation of graphitic carbon from gaseous
ethylene/hydrogen: ¼ and 1 hour reaction time. The formation of graphitic carbon is optimal at
about 550˚C resulting in 69 %[wt/wt] carbon for an experimental temperature range of 450˚C to
800˚C in the presence of an iron/copper catalyst [24]:
T [C] % CH4 %C2H4 %C2H6 %C (solid)
550- 2.8 17.1 10.7 69.4
2
Thermally formed acetylene appears at low concentrations around 700˚C [5,15]
5-2
Scenario 1 – The Manual Presentation
Figure 5-1 serves as an introduction to this type of manual fault diagnostics. It shows the
segment of the Triangle where one should expect the majority of data points to be located for
most of the fault-free load tap-changer operations (the origin). These data are typical for power
dissipation by arc, with no major gas contributions from other hotspots. The area can be referred
to as the origin for load tap-changers of the conventional type and normal performance behavior
(the diverter switch and the other assemblies are mounted in the same main tank; similar to the
case study at Kent Substation [5]). The data as presented are averages.
Figure 5-1
The Duval Triangle for Load Tap-Changer
Data points in Figure 5-1 represent averages of:

• discharge (arc) experiments in the laboratory (◆) and
• field data collected at Kent Substation (Part 2: ●, Part 3: ▲).
The studies were performed on an "in-service load tap-changer" and lasted for nine months, with
bi-weekly sampling [5]. The data are gas-in-oil data. (The total gas data, on the other hand, are
composed of gas-in-oil plus headspace gases [14].)
The data point for Kent Substation Part 2 (●) is an average of the individual data for the energized
LTC, with new diverter switch contacts. Kent Substation Part 3 (▲) is an average for the data
points with worn contacts [14,17]. The average data points for the lab and Kent Part 2 are in
good agreement, while the data point for Kent Part 3 deviates. This represents a trend for the
ageing LTC at Kent, which suffered a failure mechanism for contacts known as "bridge formation"
with a typical mixture of thermal "fault gas component" of hydrocarbons. When a pair of LTC
contacts close, the surface asperities of the mating surfaces cause the contact to form a current
carrying path. Heat is generated in these areas, and if the temperature is high enough melting
takes place [7]. The gas composition is quantitatively different from the normal mode (●) of the
LTC [5].
5-3
Scenario 2 – Kent: Field Case Study
The Triangle of Figure 5-1 established the DGA-origin for most normally operating load tap-
changers. Kent Substation data serve as the reference for a "normal" LTC throughout this paper.
Details of the gas-in-oil data are presented in Figures 5-2 and 5-3. Powertech took additional
data for a normally operating load tap-changer from Reference [4] and labeled these in
agreement with Reference [4]: B1 to B5. This load tap-changer "X" was permitted to go through
a large number of tap-change operations — from 500 to 269,000. No fault or failure occurred,
and the arrow in Figure 5-2 marks the path. We do not know whether or not this LTC was
equipped with on-line filtration. The data of load tap-changer "X" illustrate the typical footprint
of an ageing LTC, and Powertech's database of more than 400 load tap-changers is generally in
support of this path (compare with Figure 5-17, page 5-16) [5, 14].
The dataset (□) for Kent Part1was derived during an energized trial without load. Kent Part 2 (+)
and Part 3, (x), cover about 40,000 normal tap-change operations each, displaying the gradual
development of thermal problems. The diverter switch contact pairs developed heavy arc erosion
damage [7] and the fault gas ethylene remains constant in its concentration, while methane
increases above its typical value of around 15% (upwards arrow in the Triangle).
The change from pure arc performance is best shown in the Cartesian presentation of Figure
5-3 [17]. This figure shows quite clearly the differences between Part 2 and Part 3 of the field
case study at Kent Substation. The %SumArc gases decrease and the contribution of
%SumTherm increases.
Kent Part 3 shows a higher contribution of methane than load tap-changer "X", this phenomena is
believed to be due (as already mentioned) to the high temperatures as witnessed by the melting
of copper and "bridge formation" of LTC contacts. On page 5-18 a similar scenario would have
been observed for the Duval presentation of unit ANN T3M, where arcing and a melting of
contacts was accompanied by an increase in methane concentration. The tap-change operations
at Kent were accelerated to mimic a five-year maintenance period in accelerated mode [17]. The
LTC "X" of B1 to B5 [4] reaches an acetylene value of less than 10%, which is much smaller
than the value observed in Figure 5-13 for Kent Part 3. The majority of data in the database
display the same trend (Figures 5-5, 5-6). Both tap-changers, the one of Kent and LTC "X",
move towards the binary DGA system of "Ethylene–Methane". The route of LTC "X" is the
most common route for an ageing LTC. Both "pathways" are accompanied by the formation of
soot (see also Figure 5-17, section 5). Massive concentrations of dissolved gases in LTCs may
distort the overall compositional picture of DGA analysis. Purging by component gases may
occur, especially when high rates of free gas evolution are observed as in the case of hotspots
and excessive arcing.
5-4
Figure 5-2
Duval Triangle Presentation of the Field – Case Study
Kent Substation [22] and Data from Reference [4]
80
70
60
%SumArc
50
40
30 %SumTherm
20
10
0 %SumAlk
1
11
13
15
17
19
21
23
25
27
Figure 5-3
Cartesian Presentation of the Field – Case Study
Kent Substation [21]∗
∗
SumArc: acetylene, hydrogen; Sumtherm: ethylene, propene; SumAlk: methane, ethane
5-5
Scenario 3 – DGA – Fingerprint: Normal and Fault Behaviour
The third scenario (Figure 5-4) is an example of an LTC in fault mode. The data labeled
McLellan T2 and McLellan T3 are those of two load tap-changers that are sister units and are of
the same design and maintenance history. Using dissolved gas-in-oil analysis (DGA) T3 was
diagnosed as having a problem. The unit was shut down and opened to verify the diagnosis. The
field report, pictures and DGA data for this unit are detailed in Section 7. Unit T3 (▲) showed
excessive sludge formation.
Excessive sludge and coke formation in this LTC are associated, we repeat, with a move of the
data points - in the Triangle - towards the binary data set of Ethylene – Methane.
Scenario 4 – A Survey of 350 LTC
This scenario provides two DGA snapshots for the complete fleet of BC Hydro's load-tap
changers [16]. Figures 5-5 and 5-6 show the dissolved gas-in-oil data for about 350 individual
LTC units representing a typical mix of different makes and models. The data of Figure 5-6 are
sorted according to decreasing acetylene content. About 15 of these units had less than 5% of
acetylene and were marked for maintenance.
Scenario 5 – Subsets of 350 LTC
1. Subset 1 taken from the LTC set in Figure 5-5, as shown in Figure 5-7, is composed of about
120 LTC units, and these units are all of one make, but different models and age.
Figure 5-4
McLellan Substation; Predictive Maintenance "LTC in Fault Mode (●)"
5-6
Figure 5-5
All Load Tap-Changers of BC Hydro's Fleet of LTCs
Overall gas percentages
100
90
80
70
1
26
60
51
76
50
101
40
126
151
30
176
Unit Number (sorted) 20

201
226
10
251
0
276
C2H2%
301
H2%
C2H4%
326
CH4%
Figure 5-6
All Load Tap-Changers of BC Hydro's Fleet of LTCs
5-7
Within this subset there are certain models that show significantly different gassing patterns
and require custom diagnostics. This set occupies the upper region of the Triangle. The
different gassing pattern is also recognizable in the color plate Figure 5-8, which displays the
gas composition for the three hydrocarbons and hydrogen. It is plausible that the differently
behaving LTC designs provide more of a partial discharge environment rather than an arc
discharge environment. Another variable is the composition of the contacts and their catalytic
action (European make).
2. Subset 2 [16] is composed of the remaining 230 conventional LTC units (Figures 5-9 and 5-
10), which occupy the lower third of the Triangle with the exception of a few outliers. The
origin for conventional LTCs in the Triangle appears to be in the area described by >70%
acetylene, <20% methane and <20% ethylene V/V. From this position the data points of the
ageing units usually move to the right. At less than 10% acetylene there is usually a clear
indication of thermal problems accompanied by the appearance of coke [4].
Whether or not the temperature as indicated along the ethylene-side of the triangle is indeed
the actual temperature of hotspots in the LTC is debatable and can only be resolved by in-situ
or advanced temperature monitoring. Laboratory experiments [6] prove clearly that there are
low temperature and high temperature regimes for deposit formations [7,18,19].
Surely, there is a continuum for the formation of deposits beginning at low temperature and
moving to higher temperatures, as the dehydrogenation and baking of the deposits takes
place.
Figure 5-7
LTC Subset 1, One Make/Different Designs (BC Hydro)
5-8
Subset 1: Gas Percentages
100
80
1
60
15
29 40
43
57 20
71 0
Unit Number (sorted)
85
C2H2%
99 H2% CH4%
113 C2H4% C2H4%
CH4% H2%
C2H2%
Figure 5-8
LTC Subset 1, One Make/Different Designs (BC Hydro)
Figure 5-9
Subset 2, The Remaining Fleet of LTCs of about fifteen different Makes
5-9
Figure 5-10
Subset 2, The Remaining Fleet of LTCs of about Fifteen Different Makes
Scenario 6 – Effects of Filtration
The effects of filtration [15] are revisited in Figure 5-11 and Figures 8-4 to 8-10 of Section 8.
The gas concentrations for the unit without filtration begin at the far left and move over a span of
five years to the right (x). Although the unit did not reach a fault gas concentration typical for
incipient failure, the initial layers of coke were sufficiently thick to have eventually moved the
unit from fault into failure mode (Figure 8-10). The unit was saved because it reached the end of
the five-year maintenance interval and was subsequently opened and serviced.
5-10
Incipient Coking
Figure 5-11
The Field Case Study "With" and "Without Filtration" [15]3
Its identical sister unit showed no coking problems [15]. The removal of soot by on-line filtration
was effective.
The slight movement of data points as observed for the unit with on-line filtration might be due
to the deposition of soot precursors, which are formed with each LTC tap-change operation,
especially those associated with diverter switches [6].
In the case of the load tap-changer without on-line filtration, the unit should move eventually at
an accelerated pace to dissolved gas-in-oil data (Duval diagram) equivalent to the binary system
of "Methane-Ethylene", accumulation of soot and the danger of high temperature coking
(compare Figures 5-2 and 5-4). This would be the normal ageing of the unit, fault or failure
mode might of course occur before these extremes are reached, usually due to mechanical
problems.
3
In this diagram the data points (●▲) for new transformer oils can be ignored. After five years of operation the LTCs were refilled. At this time
the gas concentrations were too low to be of use for evaluation by the Triangle.
5-11
DISSOLVED GAS-IN-OIL:PARTIAL PYROLYSIS OF TRANSFORMER OIL:

THERMAL RANGE 250 to 800C
100
90
Ethane + Ethylene
At 500C the Rate for the Thermal Evolution of Hydrocarbon
Gases changes by about an Order of Magnitude
VOLUME PERCENT: [% V/V]
80
70
60
50
500C
40
30
20 Methane
10
Hydrogen
0
150 250 350 450 550 650 750 850
TEMPERATURE: [C]
Figure 5-12
Pyrolysis of Transformer Oil as DGA (Volume Percent/Four Gases)
Table 5-1
Dissolved Gas-in-Oil
T(deg. C) Hydrogen Methane Ethane Ethylene

[C] [ppm V/V] [ppm V/V] [ppm V/V] [ppm V/V]
400 104 727 315 257
450 434 1562 1105 838
500 1301 14049 8705 8483
550 2682 99536 183119 189442
600 7908 208263 472086 541624
650 13265 353436 988079 1299910
The reversing switch in Figure 8-10, section 8, shows the beginning of coking and not merely
that of sludge deposition. This type of fault is difficult to detect by DGA and usually avoided by
regular inspection, laboratory assessment of particulates and/or the use of on-line filtration [15].
5-12
Scenario 7 – Modified Duval Triangle
Laboratory data for partial-pyrolysis suggest a slightly different approach for the presentation of
LTC data [4], which has not been applied to the Triangle so far but from which it might benefit
(Figure 5-13).
Table 5-1 and Figure 5-12 show the results for the partial pyrolysis of mineral-based transformer
oils (Elkonite Micro-Furnace) [7]. In the temperature range of 500˚ to 600˚C, the mechanism and
kinetics of pyrolysis change significantly. Please see the data for the formation of graphitic
carbon in Section 5 [24]. The rate of pyrolysis increases in this range by an order of magnitude.
Composition and total gas volume are affected. This change applies to the formation of
hydrocarbon gases like ethane and ethylene, to a lesser extent to methane, but not to hydrogen.
The sum of "acetylene + hydrogen" (Figures 5-14 and 5-15) may be used to monitor the arcing
component of the LTC gases (Powertech's base ratio in % V/V). Hydrogen is viewed as a
necessary accomplice of acetylene in the energy regime of interest (arcing). Methane would be
retained and ethylene would be replaced by the sum of "ethylene + ethane" (Figure 5-12) for
monitoring the thermal component, since the two gases show related kinetic behavior in the
temperature range of interest. This approach might improve the diagnostics of DGA for load
tap-changers.
If hydrogen is present in larger amounts, it is usually due to electrical processes like arcing or
partial discharge and not to an additional thermal source. The rate of thermal production of
hydrogen is out-shadowed by the thermal generation of hydrocarbons, although at the high
temperature end of the thermal scale, thermal and arcing processes overlap. This is especially
true if coking and melting of the contacts takes place ("bridge formation", Scenario 2). The
evaluation of data supports the integration of hydrogen and acetylene, both typical arc gases.*
*
Note:
The arrow indicates the path of data B1 to B5 (Figure 5-2).
The temperature scale has not been rescaled for the edited Triangle of Figure 5-13. Guide: 500˚C is near 55%,
550˚C near 80%, and 650˚C near 87% of (ethylene + ethane) in this presentation.
5-13
Duval's Results
Averages of Kent and Lab 100 0
300°
350°
80 20
400°
450°
500°
60 40
Ethylene + Ethane %
Methane %
40 60 550°
600°
700°
800°
20
80
0 100
100 80 60 40 20 0
Acetylene + Hydrogen %
"Origin": Normal Units "N" and Kent and Lab Data
Figure 5-13
Edited Triangle displaying the Data from Reference [4]
1
10
19
100
28
37
46
80
55
64
73
60 Key Gases/TG,%
82
91
(C2H2+H2)/TCG,%
40
100
109
118
20
127
136
0
145
154
(C2H2+H2)/TCG,%
163
172
Key Gases/TG,%
181
Figure 5-14
Comparison of Base-Ratio and Key Gases (for one half of the fleet)*
*
Key gases = (methane, ethane + ethylene)
5-14
1
15
100
29
43
57
71
50
85
Key Gases/ TG,%
99
113
(C2H2+H2)/ TCG,%
127
0
141
155
(C2H2+H2)/TCG,%
169
Key Gases/TG,%
183
Figure 5-15
Comparison of Base-Ratio and Key Gases (for the rest of the fleet)
Scenario 8 – Data Of An LTC With Three Tanks
The following Figures 6-16 and 6-17 depict the unique scenario of a load tap-changer with three
tanks: A, B and C. The dissolved gas-in-oil analyses (DGA) were performed during the years
2000, 2002 and 2003. The DGA data for all three tanks deteriorated during this time frame, but
especially so in the case of Tank A.
Table 5-2
Data
Tank Year C2H2 C2H4 C2H6 CH4 CO H2 TDCG
A 2000 39,477 23,906 3,478 9,705 465 18,526 95,557

A 2002 9,482 65,214 12,021 14,328 250 23,514 124,809
A 2003 76 89,000 27,900 19,200 27 29,500 165,703
B 2000 41,626 14,086 1,422 8,293 448 18,416 84,291
B 2002 27,519 45,058 8,336 11,646 344 24,064 116,967
B 2003 16,600 49,200 9,280 12,800 219 21,800 109,899
C 2000 39,398 3,792 917 5,946 402 18,173 68,628
C 2002 32,427 27,530 5,314 7,732 340 24,779 98,122
C 2003 10,000 21,500 4,090 5,440 224, 13,500 54,754
TDCG = Total Dissolved Combustible Gases
5-15
In the case of Tank "A" the base ratio% of [(acetylene+hydrogen)/TDCG] moved from 61% to
18% while (acetylene)/TDCG in % moved from 41% to 0.05% in the year 2003.
In conclusion, the gas-in-oil data for Tank A, Tank B and Tank C follow over four years the
same pattern but Tank A approaches fault mode conditions.
Field inspection revealed severe sludging, the oil had to be replaced.
Duval Kennedy LTCs

100 0
300°
350°
80 20 400°
450°
500°
60 40
Methane % Ethylene + Ethane %
40 60 550°
600°
700°
800°
20
80
2000 2000 2000 2002 2003
2003 2002 2003
0 2002 100
100 80 60 40 20 0
Acetylene + Hydrogen %
Figure 5-16
Kennedy Substation (2003) Three separate tanks, gas composition A
5-16
Duval Kennedy LTCs

100 0
300°
350°
80 20 400°
450°
500°
60 40
Methane % Ethylene %
40 60 550°
600°
700°
800°
20
2003 2002 80
2000 2000 2000
2003 2003
2002 2002
0 100
100 80 60 40 20 0
Acetylene %
Figure 5-17
Kennedy Substation (2003) Three separate tanks, gas composition B
Ethylene and ethane should be added up, as they appear to be mechanistically connected and
increase jointly over the thermal range of 200˚C to 800˚C.
Once the DGA results for the base-ratio (acetylene + hydrogen) begin to move at an appreciable
rate to ratios lower than 70% to 80% [v/v] of the total dissolved combustible gas content
(TDCG) the unit should be flagged and observed. A typical gas-in-oil composition for a fleet of
tap-changer is shown in the base-ratio presentation of Figures 5-14 and 5-15. Key gases are
methane, ethane and ethylene, while TDCG is the sum of acetylene, hydrogen plus the key gases.
According to Figure 5-12 and Table 5-1, a jump in methane, ethane and ethylene concentrations
by an order of magnitude (hotspot of at least 500˚C to 600˚C) will indicate a major fault in the
making, while a sudden increase in the volume of arc gases (acetylene + hydrogen) would
indicate an arcing fault if the loading didn't change. The same should be true if the base-ratio
drops and the amounts of dissolved TDCG gases increases suddenly, without an increase in load
or switch frequency. The DGA point to the left of the Lab data point "□" of Figure 5-13 shows,
perhaps, such an example of a failure, which is void of a "low or medium thermal-gas
component".
In the past, Powertech documented the development of a failure in all its steps.
5-17
Molten
metal
Figure 5-18
ANN T3M – Damaged Contacts
This particular unit was serviced before reaching failure. The load tap-changer and its normally
operating sister-unit (both WCL) had the dissolved gas-in-oil signatures as summarized in
Table 5-3.
Table 5-3
ANN T3M in Severe Fault Mode [14,17]
Carbon
Code TDCG Hydrogen Methane* Ethane* Ethylene* Acetyene*
Monoxide
ANNT1M 21942 7824 197 1503 235 1997 10186

11% 2% 14% 73%
ANNT3M 38049 5988 67 7571 2108 17175 5140

24% 7% 54% 16%
* As Percent of Total Dissolved Hydrocarbon Gases; % = %[V/V]; and 4 gases* = 100 %[V/V]
(acetylene + methane + ethylene + ethane) in ppm [V/V]:

ANN T1M = 13921ppm; ANN T3M = 31994ppm
Base-Ratio in % V/V = [100*(acetylene + hydrogen)/TDCG]:
ANN T1M = 82%; ANN T3M = 29%
The ratio of: [(methane + ethane + ethylene)/(acetylene)] increased from 0.37 to 5.2 (14 fold increase)
5-18
Figure 5-19
ANN T3M – Rotor with damaged Contact removed*
Powertech Labs continues to test the relationship between DGA and coking. The fault source in
the case of ANN was a loose lug nut on the diverter switch. The fault development had three
components:
• Mechanical failure (loose bolts, caused by insufficient torque of the bolts)
• Arcing due to movement during tap-change operations
• Formation of localized, intense hotspots and melting of metal
The diagnostic sequence of events for ANN T3M was:
Fault Alert: based on gas-in-oil data (DGA), followed, at weekend, by an

*4
Imminent Failure Alert : based on unsaturated volatiles by GC/MS, which served as
temperature marker
*
The concentration, as determined by GC/MS had increased thirty-fold (propane, butane, 1-butene, 1,3-butadiene,
1-pentene, 1,3-pentadiene, 1-hexene, etc.)
4
The load tap-changer ANN T3M was mere hours away from catastrophic failure (according to the BC Hydro
engineers, who investigated the unit)
5-19
6
A COKING MODEL
Contact Fouling Model
General Considerations
Let us consider the circumstances under which a thermal LTC failure occurs [7]. Thermally
failed LTCs often exhibit severe coking of the overheated switch surfaces and adjacent areas.
Heat evolved during an LTC failure can be so excessive that the LTC oil will boil out. An LTC
that has been regularly inspected and appears to be in a normal working condition can undergo a
thermal failure that would develop over a period of just a few days.
For a thermal failure to occur, the resistive heating of the LTC must significantly exceed the
design limitations. During the periods of time between the switch operations, resistive LTC
heating occurs predominantly due to the resistances of the electrical contact surfaces. The
resistive heating power Φ dissipated at a contact is given by
I 2ϕ avg δ
Φ = I Rc =
2
, Equation 6-1
S
where I is the current, Rc is the electrical contact resistance, ϕ avg is the average electrical
resistivity of the contact layer, δ is the contact layer thickness, and S is the contact layer cross-
section.
According to Equ. 6-1, an increase in the resistive heating power Φ can occur by the following
mechanisms:
1. Increase of the contact layer thickness δ through fouling (deposition of coke on the contact
surface) or oxidation of the contact surface material.
2. Increase of the contact layer electrical resistivity if, for example, the chemical composition of
the layer changes (fouling by coke deposits or oxidation of the contact surfaces).
Temperature effects on ϕ avg are also possible.
3. Decrease of the contact layer cross-section S if the mechanical force compressing the contact
surfaces is not sufficient (the contact becomes loose).
6-1
A Coking Model
4. Increase of the current I. This is not a likely mechanism unless the LTC is severely
overloaded.
In previous work at Powertech Labs [7], we have shown that a thin microporous carbonized layer
(a few micrometers) sandwiched between the switch surfaces can develop temperatures in excess
of 200˚C. This is possible due to a combination of high current, low thermal conductivity and
high electrical resistivity of the carbonized layer. Overheating of the contact would lead to
further coking and subsequent switch failure. Thus, fouling of the contact layer (mechanisms 1
and 2) can lead to a thermal failure even if the LTC is otherwise mechanically intact (excluding
mechanism 3) and not electrically overloaded (excluding mechanism 4).
The aim of the present model is to reproduce the time behavior of the contact fouling, namely a
long induction period (measured in years) with little or no change in the contact structure,
followed by a sudden overheating and thermal failure of the LTC (measured in days).
Coke Deposition Equation
Our model takes advantage of results obtained from laboratory microcoker experiments.
According to these results, the amount of the deposit depends on the arcing pre-treatment of the
oil. Oil that is not arced will deposit little or no coke on the heated brass surface. In contrast,
arced oil will deposit a significant amount of coke. The deposit mass m, observed after a 24-
hour period, follows the Arrhenius equation
dm  E 
= KC pr exp − a  Equation 6-2
S dt  RT 
where S is the deposition surface, t is time, K is the deposition rate constant [cm/day] in the high
temperature limit, T is the temperature, R is the universal gas constant, and Ea is the activation
energy of the deposition process.
We assume that the coke deposition rate is proportional to the concentration of the coke
3
precursor Cpr [g/cm ] in the oil. The coke precursor is generated during every LTC switch
operation. We assume that the coke precursor concentration linearly increases with time:
C pr (t ) = C pr (0) + a t Equation 6-3
where Cpr(0) is the initial precursor concentration in the oil.
In Equ.6-3, parameter a describes the precursor accumulation in oil and is proportional to the
average amount of the LTC switch operations per unit of time. For an LTC in which the oil has
been recently replaced, one can assume that
C pr (0) ≈ 0 Equation 6-4
The thickness δ of the microporous carbonized contact layer can be calculated as:
6-2
A Coking Model
m
δ = Equation 6-5
ρS
where ρ is the density of the deposit. Combining Equ. 6-2 to 6-5 one obtains the equation
describing the rate of deposition of the carbonized contact layer:
dδ Ka t  E 
= exp − a  Equation 6-6
dt ρ  RT 
As can be seen from Equ. 6-6, the deposition rate depends on the temperature T of the
accumulation surface. According to [7, 27], the highest temperature attained inside the contact
layer is given by
I 2ϕ eff  δ 
2
T = Tswitch +   Equation 6-7

8 λeff  S 
where ϕ eff and λeff are the effective electrical resistivity and thermal conductivity of the contact
layer, respectively, and Tswitch is the bulk switch temperature. The difference
I 2ϕ eff  δ  2
Tsuper = T − Tswitch =   Equation 6-8
8 λeff  S 
is usually referred to as the super temperature [27].
Combining Equ. 6-6 and 6-7 one can obtain the equation describing the time dependence of the
contact layer thickness δ:
 
 
dδ Ka t  Ea R 
= exp − 2 
Equation 6-9
dt ρ  T I 2ϕ eff δ  
+   
 switch 8 λeff S 

Evaluation of the Parameters
To solve Equ. 6-9, one has to know the values of the parameters of the equation. Some of these
parameters or their combinations can be evaluated using the microcoker laboratory data. The
dynamics of the coke deposition on a brass coupon using the pre-arced oil follows the equation
dm  g   4730 
 2
= 1.21 ⋅ 10 3 exp −  Equation 6-10
S dt  day ⋅ cm   T [K ] 
6-3
A Coking Model
Comparing Equs. 6-2 and 6-10, one can estimate K Cpr = 1.21*103 [g / day cm2], and
Ea /R = 4730 K.
To estimate the parameter Ka ρ , we will take into account that the oil used in the microcoker
was conditioned by arcing to an equivalent of 5 years of LTC operation. From Equ. 6-3 and 6-4
it follows that
Ka KC pr  cm 
= ≈ 0.13  2
Equation 6-11
ρ ρt  day 
where we have used the density of charcoal (about 0.5 [g/cm3]) as an estimate for the coke
deposit density ρ.
To estimate the electrical resistivity ϕ eff we will use the results of testing of the coke deposit
formed on the brass coupon at 250˚C after 24 hours of pumping the arced oil. The resistance of
the deposit Rdep with a cross-section Sdep of 1.13 cm2 was equal to 2.17*10-3 Ohm. At 250˚C, the
coke mass mdep deposited during 24 hours is about 0.013 g. The electrical resistivity of the
deposit ϕ eff can be estimated as
Rdep ρ
ϕ eff ≈ = 0.0082 [Ohm ⋅ cm] Equation 6-12
mdep
We have not measured the thermal conductivity λeff of the coke deposit, and therefore will use
the literature value of 0.4 [W/m K ] characteristic for the microporous aerojel carbon [7]. This
aerojel carbon has an electrical resistivity of about 0.01 [Ohm cm], similar to ϕ eff . The
remaining parameters have been taken as I = 900 A, S = 2 mm2 and Tswitch = 300 K.
Analytical and Numerical Solutions
Equ. 6-9 is difficult to solve analytically. However, one can obtain the approximations of
deposit thickness δ (t) for small and large values of δ. Let us consider the situation when at the
initial moment the carbonized contact layer has not yet been deposited:
δ (0) = 0 Equation 6-13
As long as the layer thickness δ (t) is sufficiently small, i.e.,

I 2ϕ eff  δ  2
  << Tswitch Equation 6-14
8 λeff  S 
6-4
A Coking Model
the deposition rate will follow the equation
dδ Kat  Ea 
≈ exp −  Equation 6-15
dt ρ  RTswitch 
Thus, for small values of δ , the time dependence of the contact layer thickness will be given by
Ka t2  Ea 
δ (t ) ≈ exp −  Equation 6-16
2ρ  RTswitch 
In the other extreme, for sufficiently large values of δ such that

I 2ϕ eff  δ  2  E 
  >> max  Tswitch , a  Equation 6-17
8 λeff  S   R
the deposition rate will follow the equation

dδ Ka t
≈ Equation 6-18
dt ρ
Thus, for large values of δ , the time dependence of the contact layer thickness will be given by
Ka t2
δ (t ) ≈ Equation 6-19
2ρ
In the intermediate region, for values of δ such that

I 2ϕ eff  δ  2
  ≅ Tswitch Equation 6-20
8 λeff  S 
the deposition rate will accelerate with time due to the contribution of the continuously
increasing exponential term (cf. Equ. 6-9).
Comparing Equ., 6-15 and 6-18, one can see that for Ea /R = 4730 K, the deposition rate for the
large values of δ exceeds the deposition rate for the small values of δ by a factor of
 Ea 
exp −  ≈ 7.04 ⋅ 10 6 Equation 6-21
 RTswitch 
Thus, the analysis of Equ. 6-9 shows that the deposit accumulation can be characterized by:
1. Slow growth for the small values of δ (cf. Equ. 6-14 to 6-16).
6-5
A Coking Model
2. Accelerated growth for the intermediate values of δ (cf. Equ. 6-9).
3. Fast growth for the large values of δ (cf. Equ. 6-17 to 6-19).
To demonstrate the dynamics of the contact coke deposition over the entire range of time, we
have solved Equ. 6-9 numerically, using the parameter estimates from the previous subsection.
Figure 6-1 shows the time dependences of the contact layer thickness δ and super temperature
Tsuper. The regions of slow (t < 80 days) and accelerated (t > 120 days) deposit growth are clearly
visible in Figure 6-1. Both the layer thickness and super temperature rapidly increase once Tsuper
becomes comparable to the temperature of the switch (300 K).
Figure 6-2 shows the calculated time dependence of the dissipated power Φ. Following a long
incubation period (ca. 120 days), the dissipated power can suddenly increase to a level that will
exceed the normal cooling capability of the LTC, leading to an imminent LTC failure (cf. Figure
6-2).
Figure 6-1
Calculated Time Dependences of the Contact Thickness δ and Super temperature
Tsuper.
6-6
A Coking Model
Figure 6-2
Calculated Time Dependence of the Dissipated Power Φ.
6-7
7
SLUDGING: A FIELD INSPECTION
McLellan (MLN) T3 Tapchanger Inspection, March 30, 2001
LTC Type M III Y 500

Serial Number 087776
122641 Operations
This tap-changer was last inspected in June 1994 with 81031 operations. The next inspection
was scheduled for June 2002 based on a maintenance interval of eight years. The inspection was
moved ahead because the results of a gas-in-oil test showed high levels of ethylene (C2H4),
indicating a contact overheating problem. The gas-in-oil results for MLN T3 and its sister unit
MLN T2 are given below: Italic the data for the presentation in triangle format.
Table 7-1
Dissolved Gas-in-Oil for McLelland (MLN) Tapchanger
MLN T3 MLN T3 MLN T3 MLN T2 MLN T2
July 4/00 25-AUG-00 06-OCT-00 04-JUL-00 25-AUG-00
C2H2 2114* 1243 825 38806 37597
C2H4 174203 191135 178428 27982 35254
C2H6 74768 83155 84489 4196 5519
CH4 25857 26875 23161 8403 9364
CO 190 182 134 319 312
CO2 4942 4765 3844 2324 2422
H2 19446 18926 18279 19799 19556
H20 28 31 21 25 29
N2 12490 14014 29433 23110 23898
O2 1749 1142 9891 1133 1251
*All data in ppm [V/V]
7-1
Sludging: A Field Inspection
The cover was removed to reveal a thick layer of carbon sludge covering all surfaces of the tap-
changer. The sludge at the bottom of the diverter tank was so thick that it plugged the pump and
filter used to drain the oil. Station files indicate that the diverter was filled with new oil after its
last inspection in 1994.
Figure 7-1
Thick layer of carbon covering all surfaces
Figure 7-2
Carbon sludge at the bottom of the diverter tank
After the oil had been removed, a bolt was found on the bottom of the diverter tank. The bolt is
one of 24 used to fasten the three sector covers in place.
7-2
Figure 7-3
Arrow is pointing to sector cover bolt found on the bottom of the diverter tank
Of the remaining 23 bolts, 18 were found to be finger tight. One of the 18 loose bolts was ready
to fall out, only being held by several threads.
This type of failure has not been witnessed before. To prevent the bolts from loosening off, lock
tabs are bent up against the hex head. For this system to work the bolt has to be tightened to a
minimum value. On this diverter switch, the lock tabs had been bent over and were in the correct
position, yet most of the bolts were only finger tight. It is suspected that the bolts were not
tightened to the correct torque during the last inspection.
Figure 7-4
Diverter switch removed from diverter tank
7-3
Figure 7-5
Arrow show location of 4 of the 8 sector cover bolts
Figure 7-6
Arrow on left showing sector cover bolt as found. Note locking tab around bolt
Inspection of the main and arcing contacts showed no signs of overheating or excessive wear.
7-4
Figure 7-7
Minimal wear on main and arcing contacts, typical of other phases
All contact leads and braids were checked and found to be in good condition. Transition
resistors were checked and the measured values corresponded to the stated nameplate values.
Modifications to replace the solid copper potential lead with a flexible lead had not been
completed. Upon closer examination it was found that the solid copper lead had broken, but
neither the lead nor surrounding metal showed any signs of overheating or arcing.
Figure 7-8
Arrow pointing to broken potential lead as found. Red bar just below the arrow head and
to the left indicates break point of the lead.
7-5
Figure 7-9
Potential lead removed from diverter switch. Other end of the lead (not shown) was
recovered from its termination point.
After the diverter tank was cleaned, signs of water ingress were observed. It was not evident
whether this was a recent event or if it had occurred sometime in the past. Moisture levels from
the gas-in-oil samples did not show that the tap changer was wet.
The following pictures show rusting and staining in the diverter tank.
Figure 7-10
Rust on rim of diverter tank indicating water ingress. The sensing probe for low
temperature lockout protection is directly above this spot.
7-6
Figure 7-11
Water staining on the wall of the diverter tank
The laboratory and field data show where to expect the origins for a properly working load tap-
changer, an aging unit and one in fault mode (McLellan T3).
7-7
8
IN-LINE FILTRATION SYSTEM AND ADSORBENT
TECHNOLGIES:
Part 1 - Standard Filtration
Introduction
EPRI and B.C. Hydro sponsored a project on improving the maintenance of LTCs. BC Hydro
installed a number of filtration systems on load tap-changers and, as a case study, specifically
monitored two transformers with identical LTC units in the same substation, one with and one
without on-line filtration over a period of five years. The type of filtration available and installed
at that time does not appear to remove soot precursors as discussed on page 5-11 and
summarized by the term "reverse refining". Both transformers shared the same loading, and had
approximately the same number of tap changing operation over the test period. In the fall of
2001, the LTCs on both units were thoroughly inspected. The LTC equipped with the filtration
system was found in good order, whereas the unit with no filtration system was found with a
badly coked reversing switch. The field results together with laboratory research on the effect of
oil quality and contact material on coking tendency are presented. The results of the case study
support the use of on-line filtration systems for preventive maintenance of LTCs [6,15].
BC Hydro's (BCH) first encounter with on-line filtration systems was a result of Reinhausen
LTC (MR Type V) failures. All the MR Type V LTCs have since been retrofitted with on-line
filtration systems.
BCH also conducted evaluations of various commercial LTC filtration systems. In many cases, it
was found that the on-line filtration systems were very effective at removing carbon particles.
Consequentially it required a lot less time for the inspection/overhauling and cleaning of the tap
changers.
In this case study, BCH and Powertech Labs Inc. attempted to determine and quantify the
effectiveness of on-line filtration by comparing the conditions of two identical LTCs, one
installed with such filtration system and one without. The study was carried out for about five
years under the same operating conditions.
In order to better understand the causes of coking and ways to prevent it, controlled laboratory
experiments were designed and carried out to simulate field conditions. A microcoker unit was
designed and built to determine the effect of oil quality on the "coking tendency" of oil and
contact materials. In a separate experiment, the behavior of stationary contacts made of different
materials was examined at current loads as experienced in the field.
8-1
In-Line Filtration System and Adsorbent Technolgies:
Background
The study was carried out on two identical transformers with identical tap changers on the
HV/LV winding at our Mission (MIS) Station.
Transformers nameplate information:
Federal Pioneer 64000/25200 volts, 45/60/75 MVA,

65°C, ONAN. In-service date1983.
Serial numbers:
T1 – 6105-66947
T2 – 6105-66948
Tap changers nameplate information:
ASEA UZERT 380/500, 21 Taps
Serial numbers:
T1 LTC – 2284 896

T2 LTC – 2284 897
The average station load was 65.9 MVA with each of the two transformers (T1 and T2) carrying
half of the load (33.0 MVA ).
An on-line filtration system was installed on the T1 unit on August 15, 1996. At the time of
installation, there were 38513 operations. After installation, both LTCs were inspected and their
oil filtered to provide the same "initial" condition for the study.
No filtration system was installed on the T2 unit. During the study period, the filtration system
on T1 was programmed with a PLC to operate 8 hours each day: e.g. 4 hours in the morning and
4 hours in the evening. Oil samples were taken periodically and the results are shown in Figures
8-2 and 8-3.
After approximately five years of operation, (and as per the manufacturer's recommended
inspection interval), both tap changers were de energized and thoroughly inspected. The T1 LTC
was inspected on July 13, 2001 after a total of 11,622 operations. The T2 LTC was inspected on
October 11, 2001 after a total of 11,424 operations.
8-2
Inspection
Photographs of the LTCs interior were taken following oil draining but prior to any cleaning
and/or any other work. Their general condition and the condition of their reversing switch are
shown in the attached photographs (Figures 8-4 to 8-10).
T1 (with filtration system): the tap changer was found in exceptional clean condition (Figure 8-4)
with minimal amount of carbon particles, as evident from the residual oil at the bottom of tank
(Figure 8-6). All contacts including the reversing switches (Figure 8-8) were in good order. No
additional work was necessary other than replacing the door gasket.
Total Cost of Inspection Work was: $1,768.00
T2 (with no filtration system): the tap changer was in fair condition (Figure 8-5) with "usual"
amount of carbon particles on its components (note the carbon deposit on the coupling insulation
shafts between phases). The residual oil was quite dark and contained a fair amount of carbon
particles (Figure 8-7). Further examination revealed badly coked reversing switch contacts
(Figures 8-9 and 8-10). The reversing switch contacts were removed, and taken apart for
cleaning. Minor arcing was evident on the contact surface. It is believed that should this LTC
have remained in service, further and more significant damages, such as welded contacts and
cracked epoxy contact plate would be inevitable. In addition to the extra work on the reversing
switches, the other components needed to be wiped and flushed clean, and the oil needed to be
replaced.
Total cost of the inspection work was: $ 9,278.00
Diagnostics
Beginning in 1997, EPRI funded and B.C. Hydro sponsored laboratory and field work [5,13] to
improve the diagnostics for load tap-changers. The project initially consisted of three tasks:
– The development of new diagnostic tools and monitoring methods
– The uncovering of the processes, which result in coking
– The role of on-line filtration in the maintenance of LTCs.
As a result of these studies it was found and reported [3,4] that similar to the diagnostics for
transformers; fault gas detection by dissolved gas-in-oil analysis can be used to detect abnormal
conditions in LTCs. In contrast to transformer, the evolution of acetylene is normal for LTCs as
it is the result of contact making and - breaking in oil-immersed switchgear. This is especially
the case for diverter switches in load tap-changer. Diagnostically then, special attention is paid to
the evolution of LTC key gases, specifically hydrocarbons such as ethylene, ethane and methane.
These are useful for the detection of LTCs, which "go thermal" and might carbonize. Gas ratios,
8-3
similar to Roger's ratios, may be used for load tap-changers. We have chosen for our diagnostics
the Base-Ratio and the Rose-LTC ratios*. The key gases and ratios are defined below:
Base-Ratio: [((acetylene + hydrogen)/Total Dissolved Combustible Gases) 100], and is
usually • 80% for most new LTC
Rose-LTC ratio 1: [Rose-LTC key gases/Rose-LTC total gases]
Rose-LTC ratio 2: [ethylene/acetylene]
Rose-LTC ratio 3: [key gases/acetylene]
and:
Rose-LTC key gases: (methane + ethane + ethylene)
Rose-LTC total gas: (key gases + acetylene)
Fault Types
Conceptually, faults are a result of the interactions as outlined in Figure 8-1 [4] and may result
in: mechanical failures of the different components, retardation of diverter switch operation,
barrier failures, sludge formation accompanied by and the development of pyrolytic carbon
(graphitic deposits). This may give rise to related failures of the driving mechanism, contacts, the
insulation and other problems like the incrustation of springs and other moving parts by graphitic
deposits.
*
Named after Don Rose, P.E. of TXU Electric, who has applied these ratios routinely and successfully to LTC -
diagnostics.
8-4
LTC STRESSES
NORMAL ARCING DISCHARGE NORMAL RESISTIVE FAULT MODE:

SHORT DURATION HEATING Mechanical Fault,
Field Stress To Operating Temperature Excessive Arcing, Hot Spots,
Increase of Oil Temperature
TRANSFORMER OIL
Paraffins, Naphthenes, Aromatics, Dissolved Air, Metals and Plastics
REVERSE REFINING: NORMAL THERMAL AGEING CHANGE IN GAS COMPOSITION

Soot, hydrogen, alkanes, Changes in: Changes in Gas Ratios,
alkenes, alkynes, Color, Acidity, Particulate: Water, Increase in the Amounts
aromatics, polyaromatics IFT, kV
MAY LEAD TO NORMAL FAULT WILL LEAD

AND FAILURE TO
FAILURE
Figure 8-1
LTC: Conceptual Model of Failure Modes [3]
Sludge formation in load tap-changers and the resulting deposition on metallic surfaces is mainly
due to arcing at the diverter switch contacts. This becomes very much a problem if the different
switches occupy the same compartment. This was the case with the LTCs investigated in this
paper. Other investigators reported on the value of online filtration [2], but never was the success
demonstrated, with the help of a field case-study composed of two identical LTCs during a test-
duration of five years plus.
8-5
Field-Data
Diagnostically, for the two load tap-changers in question, there was nothing extraordinary of
their gas-in-oil data (DGA) during their first two or three years of operation. The gases as
evolved by the two LTC units followed pretty well the same pattern. Acetylene and the Rose-
LTC key gases (ethylene + ethane + methane), indicative of thermal problems, developed at
about the same rate and thus had similar slopes and gas ratios and were normal.
But as the time of the five-year inspection approached, this picture changed. The trends are
shown in Figure 8-2 and the Rose-ratios in Figure 8-3.
While the arc-indicating gas acetylene and the key gases follow a linear trend in the case of Unit
T1 for the next two years till inspection, Unit T2 (without filtration) shows a different trend.
KEY GASES OF LOAD TAP-CHANGER ANALYSIS: MISSION-SUBSTATION UNIT T1: WITH

FILTRATION, UNIT T2: WITHOUT FILTRATION
7000
ARCING = ACETYLENE
THERMAL = KEY GASES

6000
ACETYLENE (with filtration)
5000
CONCENTRATION [ppm V/V]
4000
ACETYLENE (without filtration)

3000
KEY GASES (without filtration)

2000
KEY GASES (with filtration)

1000
0
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500
TIME [days]
Figure 8-2
Gas-in-oil analysis (DGA) for LTC Unit T1 (in blue, linear) and Unit T2
8-6
ROSE-RATIOS FOR LOAD TAP-CHANGERS: MISSION-SUBSTATION UNIT T1 'WITH FILTRATION', UNIT T2

'WITHOUT FILTRATION'
1.20
BLUE = UNIT T1 (with filtration)
RED = UNIT T2 (without filtration)

3
1.00
WITHOUT FILTRATION
(all polynominal)
\
2
0.80
ROSE-RATIOS
0.60
0.40 1
3
2
0.20
1
\ WITH FILTRATION
(all linear)
0.00
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500
TIME [days]
Figure 8-3
Rose-LTC Ratios of gas-in-oil for LTC Unit T1 (in blue, linear) and Unit T2
Acetylene for T2 shows a downward trend and the key gases show an upward trend (Figure 8-2).
The Rose-LTC ratios for Unit T2 (Figure 8-3, non-linear) increase:
A rise in the key gases, a decline in acetylene and the increase of the Rose-LTC ratios are
indicative for an increase in the thermal component of the fault gas mixture [3]. The deposition
of soot results in an increase of ohmic resistance of the effected parts leading to Joule heating.
This is accompanied by baking of the deposit (sludge) and coke formation. Once this chain of
events commences, it accelerates and will eventually end in equipment failure.
Discussion
1. As illustrated by the Case Study, there seems to be little argument over the effectiveness of
an on-line filtration system. The DUVAL presentation (Figure 5-11) shows the trend of the
unit with filtration: the migration of the data points towards the binary data set {ethylene;
methane} has been effectively slowed down, and so delaying the thermal failure mode of
operation of this unit.
2. The question that now remains is one of investment. There is indeed a substantial investment
in terms of the initial installation cost (parts and labors), the maintenance costs (pumps and
motors and other parts do worn out) and the risk of oil leaks (there are, however, ways to
prevent draining the oil inside the LTC tank in case of a leak). On the other hand, the savings
from an on-line filtration unit are also substantial. As the Case Study indicates, there were
savings for not having to do extra work on the reversing switch, for wiping clean the
components and there was no need to replace the oil, which is a significant consideration in
terms of preserving our environment and our natural resources.
8-7
3. The most important argument in favor of on-line filtration systems is their obvious function
of keeping the oil in top condition, and thus reducing the risk of failures due to poor oil
quality. The fact that the maintenance intervals can be extended with on-line filtration system
is an added bonus.
Conclusion
There are little doubts on the effectiveness of on-line filtration systems for LTCs. While the
return on investment cannot be fully guaranteed, the most important consideration is that these
systems keep the oil clean and consequently reduce the risk of dielectric failures. Installation of
the filtration systems is recommended, particularly on those LTCs located on the line-end of the
windings.
Figure 8-4
General condition of the LTC on T1.
8-8
Figure 8-5
General condition of T2 LTC.
Figure 8-6
Residual oil in T1 LTC tank.
8-9
Figure 8-7
Residual oil in T2 LTC tank.
Figure 8-8
General condition of the reversing switch contacts on T1 LTC.
8-10
Figure 8-9
General condition of the reversing switch contacts on T2 LTC.
Figure 8-10
Another reversing switch contact on T2 LTC (No Filtration).
8-11
Part 2
Introduction
While Part 1 documented a successful field study of five-year duration at BC Hydro, which
strictly applied to the removal of particulates and perhaps water, Part 2 is more ambitious. It
applies all laboratory findings as described in this study so far with the objective to design and
build a portable filtration system, which will removes particulates and any other soluble deposit
and coke precursor from the transformer oil by applying filtration technology combined with
adsorbent technology.
Development of a Filtration System Using Adsorbent Technologies
In our previous work, it was discovered that after arced (used) oil passed through a particle filter,
and ran through the coking apparatus, it showed much higher coking tendencies than new oil.
This led to the conclusion that removing carbon particles from used LTC oil is not enough to
prevent further the coking of LTC oil, even though this might slow down the coking process
(Figures 4-5, 4-8 to 4-10). This strongly suggests that arced oil contains certain deposit-forming
precursors that are an integral part of arced oil, and that they require use of adsorbents which will
selectively remove these deposit precursors from the bulk of the oil. To prove this, the following
test was conducted.
Several batches of new mineral insulating oil (Voltesso 35) were treated in a laboratory arcing
apparatus, combined, and filtered through a 0.8µ filter. Aliquots of this arced oil were passed
through different adsorbent type filters, followed subsequently by runs through the coking
apparatus to measure their coking tendencies.
8-12
Table 8-1
Effect of Oil Treatment Using Different Adsorbents
Adsorbent Deposit Deposit Color Total Polar Comments

Type mg Reduction ASTM Compounds by
%(● note) D1500 HPLC
- 0.8* 0.5 New Oil*: Oil not arced

- 4.43 3 Arced Oil: Average of three
runs
Ad 1 1.6 64 1 604 Treated Oil
Ad 3 2 52 2.5 970 Treated Oil
Ad 5 3 32 3 1661 Treated Oil
Ad 7 1.3 70 1.2 622 Treated Oil
Ad 10 1.4 68 1.5 1069 Treated Oil
Ad 11 1.9 57 1.5 1613 Treated Oil
Ad 12 1.5 66 0.5 1167 Treated Oil
Notes:
% Reduction =[((Average mg deposit from baseline runs – mg of deposit from adsorbent treated oil)/Average mg
deposit from baseline runs)*100];
% Reduction = [((4.43mg – mg from run)/4.43mg)*100]
*
(New Oil: 0.8 mg deposit; this value did not enter the calculations!)
Standard Conditions for Adsorbent Comparison Standard Conditions for Filtration

Contact material : Copper Adsorbent volume : 42 cc
Oil Amount : 100 grams Adsorbent Column ID : 1.54 cm
Contact Temperature : 225°C Oil Temp. : 21oC (room temp)
Test Duration : 24 hours Oil flow : 5-6 cc/min
Processed oil amount : 180 cc
A comparison with the blank runs of arced oil, which had not passed an adsorbent filter,
provided the percent reduction figures. This data provides a measure of the effectiveness of
adsorbents at removing deposit-forming precursors. A total of 12 adsorbents were selected and
tested as described above. The results of these tests are shown in Table 8-1.
8-13
Treatment of Oil Over Different Adsorbents

Coking Deposit Reduction vs Total Polars
80.0 2500
C. Reduction 70.0
Total Polars
(Arbirtrary Units)
2000
60.0
50.0 1500
(%)
40.0
30.0 1000
20.0
500
10.0
0.0 0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Adsorbent
C Reduction % Polars
Figure 8-11
Carbon Deposit Reduction vs Amount of Polar Compounds Remaining in the Treated Oil
Treatment of Oil Over Different Adsorbents

Coking Deposit Reduction vs Oil Color
80.0 3.5
70.0 3.0
C. Reduction (%)
60.0 2.5
Oil Color
50.0
2.0
40.0
1.5
30.0
1.0
20.0
10.0 0.5
0.0 0.0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Adsorbent
C Reduction % Color
Figure 8-12
Carbon Deposit Reduction vs Color of Treated Oil
8-14
The test results show that Adsorbent 7 provided the highest coke deposit reduction of 70%
followed with Adsorbents 6 and 10 with 68% of coke deposit reduction. Slightly lower
performance was achieved using Adsorbents 12, 8, 1, and 11 achieving coke reductions of 66,
63, 61 and 57%, respectively. However only Adsorbents 7, 10 and 1 can be relatively easily
regenerated so they are the main candidates for filling the full-scale prototype of a
comprehensive filtration unit. At the final stage of development of the comprehensive filtration
unit, the price, availability and ease of use will determine which adsorbents will be used.
In addition to measuring the coke deposit of treated oil, the oil color and total amount of polar
compounds in untreated, and treated oil over different adsorbents, were analyzed. This was done
in an attempt to establish the procedure of measuring the oil coking tendencies. These results are
also shown in Table 8-1, and in Figure 8-11 and Figure 8-12.
From Figures 8-11 and 8-12, it can be seen that correlations between deposit reduction and color
of treated oil, or the total amount of polars remaining in the treated oil, cannot be drawn. Further
analysis of certain (specific) polars may give a better correlation, but at this point the carbon
deposit measurements in the lab apparatus stays as the only dependable test, although, it is more
cumbersome and it requires a much longer time than color or total polar analysis.
Based on the results in these tests, the design of a comprehensive filtration unit for LTC oil
treatment, being capable of removing not only the carbon particles but also deposit-forming
precursors has been completed. The simplified schematic of such a unit is shown in Figure 8-13.
Pump
P P P P
Clean Oil from
Oil LTC
AF
F - Particle Filter
AF - Adsorbent Filter
P - Pressure Gauge
Figure 8-13
Schematic of a Comprehensive LTC Oil Treatment Capable of Removing Carbon Particles
as well as Deposit-forming Precursors
We are currently in the process of building a full-scale prototype for comprehensive LTC oil
treatment. Upon commissioning, the unit will be first tested in the lab on the service aged LTC
oils, and after optimization, will be field tested on in-service LTCs.
8-15
9
COMMENTS/DISCUSSION
Comments
The subject of soot, deposit formation and filtration has been approached in a way, which should
invite knowledge-based solutions to the technical aspect of optimizing the performance of load
tap-changers. Usually, to appreciate and solve a problem, there is a need to understand the task at
hand (to minimize coking) and the availability of a sufficiently wide knowledge base.
This report provides qualitative observations as they relate to deposits and their formation, as
well as quantitative data as they relate to the amounts of deposits formed and some of the
obvious parameters affecting their formation. A mathematical model provides a description of
the growth and the dynamics of fouling for one typical environment.
A number of additives were tested for their ability to protect against coking in LTCs, and a
summary of the findings has been included. Unfortunately, these did not live-up to expectations.
Laboratory studies and field examples provide positive prove about precursors and sludge
formation and recommend certain control strategies.
Finally, a graphical presentation has been provided, which with the help of the Triangle Method
and field data illustrates the dynamics of coking in load tap-changers. Chapter 5 and Figure 5-13
provide an appreciation of how a certain pattern for the coking of load tap-changers emerges.
This latter part provides an approach for the development of an algorithm and diagnostics of load
tap-changers, by means of dissolved gas-in-oil analysis.
By developing the micro-Coker as shown in Figure 3-3 and Figure 4-21 [5], a new and effective
tool for the assessment of coking tendencies of new or used transformer fluids is now available.
Perhaps it can serve as the corner stone for the development of an appropriate ASTM test. The
objectives and tasks as set by EPRI, which were to investigate the causes for deposit formation,
coking and measures to prevent it, have been met.
Discussion
If laboratory data are to be applied successfully to field situations, the minimum requirements are
that certain parameters of interest such as the formation of deposits can be studied under
applicable guidelines of QA and QC. The tests should be accurate and reproducible. The micro-
Coker fulfills those requirements.
9-1
Comments/Discussion
The concept of fouling as borrowed from the oil industry and described briefly in Chapter 1 of
this report is applicable to oil-immersed switchgear. The five parameters as listed are of interest
to the discussion of sludge and deposit formations in LTCs.
Deposit thickness is proportional to arc time (number of LTC switch operations), contact time
(hot metallic surfaces in a load tap-changer), and to the Arrhenius temperature function (Figure
4-3). Thus fouling models like the one by Watkinson and Epstein (Table 1-1) should apply to
load tap-changer. If arcing during the making and breaking of contacts can be limited or made to
disappear, the soluble precursors to deposit formation will be dramatically reduced and the rate
of deposit formation will approach zero (Figure 4-5). It is conceivable that arcing processes in
oil-immersed switchgear can be greatly reduced by using smart switch designs, a newly revised
combination of mechanical and electrical layout. Perhaps, energy dissipation by arcing can be
replaced by a combination of partial discharge and thermal dissipation. Indications are that these
principles, rather than energy dissipation by brute arcing, is used at the present time by at least
one of the manufacturers of load tap-changer.
Unfortunately, most North-American utilities still have a large fleet of older equipment, which
cannot be redesigned or upgraded. Methods like on-line filtration will bridge the technological
gap and improve/extend the service life and maintenance interval without premature failure due
to coking. The present work on a filtration unit, which also removes oil-soluble coke precursors,
shall improve the efficiency of on-line filtration greatly and thus reduce the danger of coke
formation.
Vegetable oil-based or synthetic ester-based transformer fluids, due to their polarity, apparently
show excellent adherence to metallic surfaces (Figure 4-7), which might result in properties of
oil-immersed switchgear that do not recommend them for the use in LTCs. This is a preliminary
observation, which requires further investigation.
The formation of deposits from filtered, arced transformer oils in the laboratory, the results of
elemental analysis, and investigation by infrared and thermal analysis [5,6] are similar to those of
LTC field samples and opens the way for the systematic design of preventative techniques and
field diagnostics.
Laboratory-simulations, field-case studies and database-based diagnostics supplement each other

in deciding what needs to be done to prevent coking in load tap-changers.
Most normally ageing LTC units move towards the binary system "Ethylene+Methane",
(Figure 5-17) and along a path of about 15% Methane (five-gas fault diagnostics). A smaller
number of LTC units behave as shown in the upper part of Figure 5-7; the dissolved gas-in-oil
data remain in an area of high methane around 70% and low acetylene of about 30% (three-gas
fault diagnostics). Both types of equipment reach the binary system of "Ethylene+Methane"
after several years or an equivalent large number of switch operations, whatever comes first
(Duval three fault-gas diagnostics).
9-2
Comments/Discussion
• Units, which move suddenly out of these normal fault-gas areas are suspect due to their
abnormal behavior and should be flagged for observation. (Example: Table 5-3, ANN T3M)
• Units, which move systematically but relative slowly into the binary system of
"Ethylene+Methane" should be flagged for normal maintenance. There is a real danger
arising from a high soot and soluble precursor content, in that it might lead to severe coking
(Example: Figure 5-4 and Field Report).
A good example for the justification of maintenance intervals is the load tap-changer of
Figure 5-11 and its documentation. Filtration makes a difference and it shows in the DGA – data,
while the DGA-data of the LTC without on-line filtration do not yet indicate a fault or failure
mode, pictorial evidence from the field shows the formation of coke, which will accelerate with
time (Section 6).
Effective filtration, which removes soot and other coke precursors that formed during contact
making and contact breaking, should retard migration to the binary system "Ethylene+Methane"
and should minimize, if not eradicate, coking (Figures 5-4 and 5-11). Mechanical and/or
electrical failure are exempt.
The preliminary results of adsorbent filtration allow for the design and building of a successful
adsorbent filtration system that surpasses the traditional filtration systems as described in Part 1,
paragraph 8.
9-3
10
CONCLUSION
Recent Experimental Findings Related To Coking
Laboratory Results and Fouling Model
1. Soot formation and the accumulation of chemical compounds summarized by the term
reversed refining and thermally accelerated ageing are the greatest sources of precursors to
coking.
2. The concept of fouling as borrowed from the oil industry and described briefly on pages 1-2
to 1-3 of this report is applicable to oil-immersed switchgear.
3. Deposit thickness is proportional to arc time (number of LTC switch operations), contact
time (hot metallic surfaces in a load tap-changer), and to the Arrhenius temperature function.
Thus, fouling models can be designed, which apply to load tap-changer.
4. The mathematical evaluation of one LTC scenario resulted in an expression describing the
time dependence of the contact layer (Figure 6-1). The numerical evaluation shows the
development of super temperature and contact thickness in time and a scenario for LTC
failure, which can come about very suddenly after a certain time of incubation (Figure 6-2).
A Review Of DGA, Sludge Formation And Coking
Laboratory Results and LTC Field Data
1. Powertech Labs Inc. states [17] that the DGA data for most conventional LTCs is an arc-gas
component of about 70% to 90% V/V. This was called the LTC base-ratio. The LTC base-
ratio equals the sum of the dissolved gas (acetylene + hydrogen) over the (total dissolved
combustible gas concentration) or TDCG expressed in percent (ppm, V/V). This gas ratio for
an LTC in the normal mode of operation shows itself in the Triangle as the area of "Origin".
2. If for some reason this ratio drops suddenly below 70%, the effected LTC unit should be
observed. Once serious problems develop, the base ratio will drop significantly, and the
observed hydrocarbon concentrations of ethylene, ethane and methane will increase by an
order of magnitude (hotspot temperatures around 400°C to 500°C). This can be judged by
comparing the effected unit with a parallel unit of the same make and model. The gas-
composition marker for this LTC will move to the right in the Triangle. A survey of LTCs
10-1
Conclusion
will show where the individual units have their origin. Certain makes/models deviate from
this type of generalization and require individual attention.
3. Of the possible LTC fault modes, coking as a result of soot accumulation is one of the more
difficult to spot. On-line filtration is the best protection.
4. Reversing switches, which remain stationary for longer periods of time should be moved
several times through neutral to avoid the formation of hotspots. Silver alloys or silver coated
contact surfaces show a definite advantage in this situation.
5. The most important causes for the formation of hotspots are mechanical failure followed by
arcing and associated heating of contacts and conductors.
Examples of a Field Inspection
McLellan (MLN) T3 Tap-changer Inspection, Soot Formation, March 30, 2001
1. The field report shows that even in the case of a load tap-changer that lacks obvious signs of
arcing or overheating dissolved gas-in-oil analysis can provide the correct "fault-signature"
that demands a field inspection. The fault unit T3 had mechanical problems with improperly
torqued bolts and missing grounding connections. The laboratory data attest that this
situation promoted the premature ageing of the transformer oil and excessive sludge
formation, which would have resulted in early failure.
Mission (MIS) Tap-changer Inspection, ASEA UZERT 380/500, 21 Taps: T1 LTC and
T2 LTC, Standard Filtration, June – October, 2001
2. There are little doubts on the effectiveness of on-line filtration systems for LTCs. While the
return on investment cannot be fully guaranteed, the most important consideration is that
these systems keep the oil clean and consequently reduce the risk of dielectric failures.
Installation of the filtration systems is recommended, particularly on those LTCs located on
the line-end of the windings.
10-2
11
RECOMMENDATIONS
Possible Options To Eliminate Or Reduce Coke Formation
1. It is conceivable that arcing processes in oil-immersed switchgear can be reduced

significantly, through the design of "smart switchgear", resulting from a thorough revision of
the existing mechanical and electrical layouts. Perhaps, energy dissipation by arc can be
replaced by a combination of partial discharge and thermal energy dissipation. This measure
of arc elimination will have the additional benefit of eliminating extreme hotspots (on the
diverter switch contacts). The effect of both will be the removal of soluble and colloidal coke
precursors and the reduction of coke deposition. Indications are that this principle is, rather
than brute energy dissipation, already in use. Our DGA-data show that at least one of the
manufacturers of load tap-changer achieves the objective.
2. Filtration, supplemented by adsorption, should retard the migration of DGA-markers in the

Triangle to the binary system of Ethylene+Methane, which necessarily is accompanied by
soot formation and will with high probability result in coking. Filtration will thus minimize,
if not eradicate coking. Mechanical or electrical failure is exempt.
11-1
12
REFERENCES
1. Spence, G. and Hall, A.C., "Users Experience and Perspective", IEEE European Seminar
'On-Load Tap-Changers Current Experience and Future Development', Regensburg,
Germany, 9th Nov. 1995, Digest No. 1995/198
2. Kang, P., Birtwhistle, D., Daley, J., and McCulloch, D., Private Communications, "Non-
Invasive On-Line Condition Monitoring of On-load Tap Changers", Queensland University
of Technology, Brisbane, Australia; Energex, Brisbane, Australia, 1998
3. Dietrich, M.W., "An International Survey on Failures in large Power Transformers in

Service", Final report of Working Group 05 of Study Committee 12 (Transformers), Electra
No. 88, May 1983•
4. Duval, M., "A Review of Faults Detectable by Gas-in-Oil Analysis in Transformers", IEEE
Electrical Insulation Magazine, May/June 2002 – Vol. 18, No. 3
5. EPRI Report #1006654: "Transformer Load Tap Changer Management, Diagnostics, Contact
Coking, and On-line Filtration", Technical Progress Report, December 2001
6. EPRI Report #1001775: "Load Tap Changer Oil Quality Analysis, Lessons Learned", Final
Report October 2002
7. Schellhase, H.U., Pollock, R.G., Rao, A.S., Korolenko, E.C., Barry Ward, "Load Tap
Changers: Investigations of Contacts, Contact Wear and Contact Coking", Electrical
Contacts-2002, Proceedings of the Forty-Eighth IEEE HOLM Conference on Electrical
Contacts
8. Sprague, D.E., Nalco Chemical Co., TX; Roy, K., Crown C. Petroleum, Houston, TX
"Statistical Determination of the Performance and Coking Rate of Fired Heaters", Street-
smarts, Chemical Engineering Progress, 1990, Vol. 86, No. 8, p. 14 - 20
9. Taborek, J., Aoki, T., Ritter, R.B., Palen, J.W., Heat Transfer Research, Inc. Alhambra,
California; Knudsen, J.G., Oregon State Univ., Ore; Chemical Engineering Progress, Vol. 68,
No. 7, July 1972]
10. Heat Transfer Research, Inc. (HTRI), "Global Fouling Research Program", The Exchanger
on line, Issue 6.3, [http://www.htrinet.com/Newsletters/Exch63gfrp.html]
11. Field, N., Antosz, S.Weidmann-ACTI, Cramer, S., PGandE, "Condition-Based Ranking of
Power Transformers", Weidmann-ACTI Conference, Las Vegas, Nevada, November 8, 2002
12-1
References
12. Wang, Zhenyuan; "Artificial Intelligence Applications in the Diagnosis of Power

Transformer Incipient Faults"; Dissertation submitted to the Faculty of the Virginia
Polytechnic Institute and State University;, Blacksburg, Virginia, August 8, 2000
13. Lau, M., Horn, W., BC Hydro; Ward, B., Electric Power Research Institute; "Utility Sleuths
Detect LTC Contact Wear", Transmission and Distribution World, June 1999
14. H. Schellhase, D. Pugh, "Maintenance-Free Load Tap Changer (LTC)", EPRI – Substation
Equipment Diagnostics Conference IX, New Orleans, Louisiana, February 18–21, 2001.
15. Lau, M., Horn, W., BC Hydro; Schellhase, H.-U., Dominelli, N.; Ward, B., EPRI;
"Successful Application of Filtration System on On-Load Tap-Changers – A Case Study";
2002 International Conference of DOBLE Clients, Boston, MA, USA
16. Schellhase, H.-U., "Novel Diagnostics for Load Tap-Changer (LTC/OLTC)", Tutorial
Session, IEEE/PES Transformer Committee, Vancouver, B.C. , Canada, April 14 – 18, 2002
17. Schellhase, H.U., Dominelli, N., "Maintenance Free Load Tap-Changers (LTCs) Coking:
Experimentsand Analysis", Presentation, EPRI Review Meeting, ConEd Headquarters,4
Irving Place, New York, July 9th, 1999
18. EPRI Report #1001946: "Development of Load Tap Changer Monitoring Technique,
Mechanism of Coking", Technical Progress Report, December 2001
19. Savio, L.J., Transformer Consultant; Ward, B., EPRI; Crutcher, R., Microlabs Northwest;
Hanson, D., Haupert T., TJ/H2b Analytical Services; "Analysis of Coke Formation on LTC
Contacts using Optical Microscopy", Proceedings of the 2000 International Conference of
Doble Clients – Sec 8-11
20. Bartnikas, R., Editor, IREQ; "Engineering Dielectrics, Volume III, Electrical Insulating
Liquids"; ASTM Publication (PCN) 31-002093-21; Monograph 2; 1994
21. CEA, "Recycled Oils", CEATI Report No. T994700-5018, 2002
22. H. Schellhase, E.A. Hall, R.G. Pollock, "Towards Maintenance-Free Load Tap Changer
(LTC) II", EPRI – Substation Equipment Diagnostics Conference X, San Antonio, Texas,
February 17-20, 2002.
23. Schellhase, H., "Investigation of Contact Coking and Deposit Formation",

Presentation:EPRI-Review, Maintenance-Free Load Tap-Changer (LTC), Powertech Labs
Inc., Oklahoma City, October 24-25th, 2002
24. Krishnankutty, N.; Article No. 0021; Journal of Catalysis 158, 217-227 (1996);
12-2
References
25. Kang, P., Birtwhistle, D., "Analysis of Vibration Signals for Condition Monitoring of Power
Switching Equipment using Wavelet Transform", School of Electrical and Electronic
Systems Engineering, Queens land University of Technology, Brisbane, Qld, Australia;
Proceedings of the IEEE-SP International Symposium on Time Frequency and Time – Scale
Analysis: Oct. 6-9, 1998
26. Kang, P., Birtwhistle, D., "Application of Condition Monitoring and Diagnostic Techniques
for On Load Tap Changers", Research Concentration of Electrical Energy, Queensland
University of Technology, Australasian Universities Power Engineering Conference, Sydney,
Australia, 29th – 1st October 1997, pp. 545-550
27. Holm, R., "Electric Contacts", 4th edition, Springer-Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg New York,
1981, p. 80.
28. Krims, M., Borsi H., and Glockenbach, E., "Influence of Carbon Particles on the Breakdown
Voltage of Transformer Oil", Schering Institute of High Voltage Technique and Engineering,
University of Hannover, Germany; Conference Record of the ICDL '96 12th International
Conference on Conduction and Breakdown in Dielectric Liquids, Roma, Italy, July 15-19,
1996, pp. 296.
29. Schellhase, H.U., Hall, E.A., Korolenko, E.C., Olan, D.J., Ward, B.H.; "A Critical
Assessment of Fouling and Coking of Load Tap Changers", 2003 International Conference of
DOBLE Clients, Boston, MA, USA
30. "Storage Stability of Middle Distillate Fuels", Canadian Electrical Association Report No.
341 G469, Montreal, Quebec, Canada, August 1988.
12-3
A
APPENDIX
Figure A-1
Thermo Gravimetric Analysis of Deposit (to 250˚C)
A-1
Appendix
Figure A-2
Thermo Gravimetric Analysis of Deposit (to 400˚C)
EFFECTS OF ARCTIME ON VOLATILES: Set #1
3.50
RELATIVE CONCENTRATIONS: [ppm by wt.]
1, 3-Butadiene
3.00 \
Propyne Propene
1, 3 Butadiyne
2.50
Propadiene
2.00
Methyl Propene
1.50
1-Butene
1.00
Pentane
0.50
Butane
Propane
0.00
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
AMOUNT OF ARCING: [HRS]
Figure A-3
Effect of Arc Time on Volatiles (Set 1)
A-2
Appendix
EFFECTS OF ARCTIME ON VOLATILES: Set #2
2.00
RELATIVE CONCENTRATIONS: [ppm by wt.]
1.80 1, 3-Pentadiene
1.60
1-Butene-3-yne
1.40
1.20
Ethyl Benzene
Styrene
1.00
Benzene
0.80
Ethynyl Benzene
0.60
Unknown
0.40
Toluene
0.20
0.00
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
AMOUNT OF ARCING: [hours]
Figure A-4
Effect of Arc Time on Volaties (Set 2)
A-3
Program: About EPRI
Transmission Substations EPRI creates science and technology solutions for
the global energy and energy services industry. U.S.
electric utilities established the Electric Power
Research Institute in 1973 as a nonprofit research
consortium for the benefit of utility members, their
customers, and society. Now known simply as EPRI,
the company provides a wide range of innovative
products and services to more than 1000 energy-
related organizations in 40 countries. EPRI’s
multidisciplinary team of scientists and engineers
draws on a worldwide network of technical and
business expertise to help solve today’s toughest
energy and environmental problems.
EPRI. Electrify the World
© 2003 Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI), Inc. All rights

reserved. Electric Power Research Institute and EPRI are registered
service marks of the Electric Power Research Institute, Inc.
EPRI. ELECTRIFY THE WORLD is a service mark of the Electric
Power Research Institute, Inc.
Printed on recycled paper in the United States of America
1002048
EPRI • 3412 Hillview Avenue, Palo Alto, California 94304 • PO Box 10412, Palo Alto, California 94303 • USA
800.313.3774 • 650.855.2121 • askepri@epri.com • www.epri.com

Development of A Filter Using Absorbant Technologies For The Removal of Coking Precursers

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Development of A Filter Using Absorbant Technologies For The Removal of Coking Precursers

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Development of a Filter Using Absorbant

Technologies for the Removal of Coking

Interim Report, November 2003

EPRI Project Manager

(A) MAKES ANY WARRANTY OR REPRESENTATION WHATSOEVER, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, (I)

(B) ASSUMES RESPONSIBILITY FOR ANY DAMAGES OR OTHER LIABILITY WHATSOEVER

ORGANIZATION(S) THAT PREPARED THIS DOCUMENT

Powertech Labs Inc.

This report was prepared by

Powertech Labs Inc.

This report describes research sponsored by EPRI and B.C. Hydro.

Results & Findings

Challenges & Objectives

In addition to acetylene, hydrogen, and particulate carbon, arcing in oil-immersed switchgear

1 OVERVIEW AND INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................1-1

2 BACKGROUND AND PREVIOUS FINDINGS .......................................................................2-1

5 DISSOLVED GAS-IN-OIL DATA (DGA), SLUDGE FORMATION AND COKING ................5-1

6 A COKING MODEL ................................................................................................................6-1

7 SLUDGING: A FIELD INSPECTION ......................................................................................7-1

8 IN-LINE FILTRATION SYSTEM AND ADSORBENT TECHNOLGIES: ................................8-1

A APPENDIX ............................................................................................................................ A-1

Figure 3-1 Schematic of Arcing Setup .......................................................................................3-1

Table 1-1 Comparison of Fouling Models ..................................................................................1-3

Coking is an advanced form of fouling commonly encountered in the refining of petroleum

(For fr approaching fd, the rate of fouling approaches zero.)

Model Deposition Term d

Kern and Seaton Proportional to Proportional to fouling Sedimentation; however,

Reitzer Proportional to super- None Combination of dust from

Previously Reported Findings

120V 58V V&I

It was estimated that 6 hours of arc-stress would produce concentrations of unsaturated

Drierite Filled Breather

Stainless Steel Lines

Timer & Thermocouple

Coke Formation: Field Data And Laboratory Results

Deposit Formation: Pictorial -, Qualitative - and Quantitative Records

Simple Quantitative Relationships: Figures 4-1 to 4-5

DEPOSIT FORMATION versus TEMPERATURE

ARRHENIUS PLOT: Ln [Amount of Deposit/sqcm] versus [1000*(1/T)]

DEPOSIT FORMATION vs. ARC TIME

DEPLETION OF DEPOSIT PRECURSORS

SAME OIL: THREE SEQUENTIAL RUNS WITH 3 INDIVIDUAL COUPONS

Figure 4-6 Figure 4-7

Figure 4-8 Figure 4-9 Figure 4-10

RUN #3 RUN #4 RUN #5

Figure 4-11 Figure 4-12 Figure 4-13

RUN #6 RUN #7 RUN #8

Figure 4-14 Figure 4-15

RUN #9 RUN #10

Figure 4-16 Figure 4-17

RUN #11 RUN #12

Figure 4-18 Figure 4-19

RUN #13 RUN #14:

Gaseous Deposit Precursors: Possible Participation of Simple Triple Bond

Propyne to Propane Ratio vs. Coking Time

Acetylene to Ethane Ratio vs. Coking Time

Solid and Soluble Precursors for Deposits: Soot Formation

TRANSFORMER OIL Voltesso-35:

300 (dy/dx) = 1.98

The switch-operations of oil immersed switchgear produce, as a result of arcing, a plethora of

SOOT FORMATION IN AN LTC AS A RESULT OF ARCING:

Hot Surface Deposits