Page 9 - Energize September 2022
P. 9

COVER STORY




                                                                Bushing condition   % PF at 20˚C and 1 Hz

                                                                Good               0.2 – 0.5

                                                                Moderate           0.5 – 0.75


                                                                Severe             0.15 – 0.2 and 0.75 – 1.25

                                                                Extreme            <0.15 and >1.25
                                                               Table 4: Megger proposed PF limits at 1 Hz
        Figure 4: Thermal response curves
                                                                Bushing         % mc or         Conductivity of the
        deteriorates, the temperature correction factor increases, which        contamination   oil at 25˚C (pS/m)
        means that temperature dependence is directly related to the
        dielectric response of the bushing. In these results, bushing X 3   X1   2.5            0.185
        shows much greater temperature dependency than bushings X 1
        and X 2. This is a good indication that there are problems with   X2    1.9             0.05
        bushing X 3.
           On the basis of studies carried out over more than 20 years as   X3   4.8            0.034
        a leading expert in DFR testing, Megger has proposed the limits   Table 5: Results obtained from DFR analysis
        shown in Table 4 for  PF% values measured at 1 Hz.
           The high  PF% measured on bushings X 1 and X 3 at 1 Hz   Bushing condition   % mc or    Conductivity of the
        indicates insulation-related problems but gives no indication             contamination   oil (pS/m)
        of whether the problem is in the liquid insulation or the solid
        insulation. To establish this, a full DFR analysis was carried out.  Good   0.15 – 0.5   0.001 – 0.37

        Stage 3: DFR analysis                                   Moderate          0.5 – 1       0.37 – 3.7
        The results obtained from the DFR analysis are shown in Table 5.
        Megger’s proposed limits for moisture concentration percentage   Severe   1 – 2.5       3.7 – 37
        (mc%) ) and conductivity of the oil are shown in Table 6. Table 7
        summarises the results obtained from the collective testing carried   Extreme   >2.5    >37
        out on the bushings and reveals their final assessments.  Table 6: Megger’s proposed limits for moisture concentration


        Conclusion                                             allows the amount of moisture in the solid insulation and the
        Line frequency PF testing, which has traditionally been used   conductivity of the oil to be estimated. DFR also eliminates the
        for bushing condition assessment, has limitations that can be   problem of the temperature dependence of PF measurements.
        overcome by using DFR tests. Because of the increased sensitivity   Finally, the difficulties sometimes associated with carrying out DFR
        of PF to moisture and contamination at lower frequencies, DFR   testing in electrically noisy environments can now be solved by
        testing allows bushing insulation problems to be detected at an   using test voltages up to 1,4 kV rms.
        earlier stage.
           Any remaining uncertainty about condition after NB DFR   Contact Marie-Claude Rasendra, Megger,
        testing can be eliminated by carrying out a full DFR test, which   Marie-Claude.Rasendra@megger.com, www.megger.com


         Bushing   % LFPF    LFPF as per    LFPF at per   % PF at 1 Hz   % PF at 10 Hz   % mc   Conductivity of the   FINAL
                             IEEE C57.152   Cigré TB 445                             oil (pS/m) at 25˚C   DECISION

         X1        0.454     Bad          Good        1.32        0.55        2.5    0.185             Severe

         X2        0.271     Good         Good        0.66        0.29        1.9    0.058             Severe


         X3        1.14      Bad          Bad         11.9        3.6         4.8    0.034             Extreme
        Table 7: Summary of results from collective testing



                                                  energize | September 2022 | 7
   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   11   12   13   14