Sweep Frequency Response Analysis

Knowledge Is Power SM
Apparatus Maintenance and Power Management

for Energy Delivery
Sweep Frequency Response

Analysis
Transformer Properties
Dielectric Strength (Insulation)
Thermal Heating (Loss of Life)
Mechanical Strength

for Energy Delivery
Obvious Problem

for Energy Delivery
Questionable Damage

for Energy Delivery
Good or Bad

for Energy Delivery
Current Techniques
Sweep Frequency Response Analysis (SFRA)

Leakage Reactance
Capacitance
*Excitation Current (Core Integrity)
These independent diagnostic methods have
their place in ascertaining transformer condition

for Energy Delivery
Diagnostic Tests
DIELECTRIC THERMAL MECHANICAL
DGA DGA SFRA
Oil Screen Oil Screen Leakage Reactance
Power Factor Thermal Imaging Capacitance
Capacitance DC Winding Resistance Exciting Current
Exciting Current DC Winding Resistance
TTR
Partial Discharge
Dielectric Spectroscopy
AC Hipot
DC Hipot
Insulation Resistance

for Energy Delivery
Purpose
Assess Mechanical Condition of Transformers
(mechanical distortions)
Detect Core and Winding Movement
Due to large electromagnetic forces from fault
currents
Winding Shrinkage causing release of clamping
pressure
Transformer Relocations or Shipping

for Energy Delivery
Purpose
Simply Stated: To measure the frequency
response of passive elements (RLC) for various
types of power apparatus. The result is a transfer
function which produces a fingerprint related to
the mechanical geometry for a given apparatus
(i.e. transformers, reactors, generators, and
motors).

for Energy Delivery
FRA History
1960: Low Voltage Impulse Method was first proposed by

W. Lech & L. Tyminski in Poland for detecting transformer
winding deformation.
1966: Results published as Detecting Transformer Winding

Damage - The Low Voltage Impulse Method by Lech &
Tyminski in The Electric Review, ERA, UK
1976: Frequency Domain Analysis of Responses From L.V.I.

Testing of Power Transformers by A.G. Richenbacher
presented at the 43rd Doble Intl Client Conference
1978: Transformer Diagnostic Testing by Frequency

Response Analysis, published by E.P. Dick & C.C. Erven,
Ontario Hydro in IEEE Transactions of Power Delivery.

for Energy Delivery
FRA History Cont.
1978: Ontario Hydro develops the FRA test.
1988 - 1990: Proving trials by European utilities, the

technology cascades internationally via EuroDoble and
CIGRE.
1991 to Present: Results & Case Studies are published

and presented validating the FRA method.

for Energy Delivery
FRA Methods
Sweep Frequency (SFRA)
Apply a 10 volt peak to peak sinusoidal signal from a
network analyzer (M5100) to a winding and measure the
signal input/output from other end of same winding, or
from another winding as function of frequency
Low Voltage Impulse (LVI)

Apply impulse to a winding and measure input &
response signals using high speed digitizer. Perform FFT
calculation to convert time domain into frequency domain

for Energy Delivery
Sweep Frequency Method
Vin
H (dB) 20 log10
Vout Frequency Range
Vin 10 Hz - 10 Mz
H ( ) tan
1

Vout

for Energy Delivery
Sweep Method Test Diagram

for Energy Delivery
Impulse Method

for Energy Delivery
SFRA Fundamentals and Concepts
RLC Circuits
(Series, Parallel, S/P, Lumped, Distributive)
Frequency Domain
(Fourier(jw), Laplace(s), DFT, FFT)
Two Port Networks
(input/output admittance, transfer
admittance)
Transfer Function
(Magnitude, Phase, Bode Plot)
Vmeasure(jw) = H(jw)*Vsource(jw)
-20*log10(Vsource/Vmeasure), dB

for Energy Delivery
Transfer Function Principle
The RLC Network offers different
impedance paths at different frequencies.
The transfer function at each frequency is a

measure of the effective impedance of the
RLC network.
Changes in geometry due to deformation

alter local RLC values and so modify the
transfer function at various frequencies.

for Energy Delivery
Define Parameters
Exciting Currents
Leakage Reactance
Sweep Frequency Response Analysis
LOOK AT SIMPLE MODEL


for Energy Delivery

for Energy Delivery

for Energy Delivery

for Energy Delivery

for Energy Delivery
Tests Categories
Exciting Current - CORE
Leakage Reactance - WINDINGS

for Energy Delivery
Test Results (Exciting Currents)
50 Hz or 60 Hz
Influenced by core
Current Magnitude, Power Loss (Eddy Currents) at

10 kV.
Turn to Turn, Core Grounding, Core Faults

for Energy Delivery
Test Results (Leakage Reactance)
50 Hz or 60 Hz
Influenced by windings (Impedance)
Impedance (Per Unit)
Winding Movement
3 Phase Equivalent or Per Phase

for Energy Delivery
SFRA
HOW DOES IT FIT !

for Energy Delivery
SFRA
Can be applied in the same way
as exciting currents and leakage
reactance.

for Energy Delivery
Parallel RLC Circuit

for Energy Delivery
Response of the RLC Circuit

for Energy Delivery
M5100 SFRA Measures R Circuit

for Energy Delivery
M5100 SFRA Measures L Circuit

for Energy Delivery
M5100 SFRA Measures C Circuit

for Energy Delivery
Capacitor & Inductor

for Energy Delivery
Transformers are R-L-C Circuits
HV
Winding CH CH CH
CT CT
RH LH RH LH
Inter
CHL CHL CHL Winding
RL LL RL LL
CL CT CL CT CL
LV
Winding

for Energy Delivery
Frequency Band Sensitivity
Experience to date shows that certain bands
indicate different problem conditions
Low Frequencies (<5 kHz) - scan sensitive to core
deformation, open circuits, shorted turns & residual
magnetism
Mid Frequencies (10 kHz > freq < 600 kHz) - scan is
sensitive mainly to bulk winding movements
High Frequencies (> 750 kHz) - scan is sensitive to
movement of inter-connections, winding leads, LTC
and DETC connections.
Special note for short circuit tests

for Energy Delivery
HV Winding Responses

for Energy Delivery
Testing Preparations
Transformer should be disconnected from

system
Transformer should be in normal service
condition (assembled, oil-filled)
Make connections as determined by
winding configuration. Phases not under
test are left floating.

for Energy Delivery
Typical Test Connections for a Delta-
Wye unit
H1-H3 } HV Winding Tests
H2-H1
H3-H2
X1-X0 } LV Winding Tests
X2-X0
X3-X0
H1-X1 } Cross-Winding Tests
H2-X2
H3-X3

for Energy Delivery
Typical Test Connections for a Delta-
Wye unit Cont.
H1-H3 } HV Winding Tests with
H2-H1 X1-X2-X3 Shorted
H3-H2

for Energy Delivery
Typical Test Connections
Auto Transformer w/Tert
H1-X1 } Series Winding Tests
H2-X2
H3-X3
X1-H0X0 } Common Winding Tests
X2-H0X0
X3-H0X0
Y1-Y3 } Tert Winding Tests
Y2-Y1
Y3-Y2

for Energy Delivery
Cont.
H1-H0X0 } Short Circuit Tests
H2-H0X0 X1-X2-X3 Shorted
H3-H0X0 H0X0 Floating]
H1-H0X0 } Short Circuit Tests

H2-H0X0 Y1-Y2-Y3 Shorted
H3-H0X0 H0X0 Floating

for Energy Delivery
Cont.
H1-Y1 } H to Y Inter-Winding Tests
H2-Y2
H3-Y3
X1-Y1 } X to Y Inter-Winding Tests

X2-Y2
X3-Y3

for Energy Delivery
Simple XFMR Model
R R L L R R
DC-1 L-1 1 2 L-2 DC-2
L C
m UST
E1 E2
R
m

for Energy Delivery
Typical SFRA Response

for Energy Delivery
Typical SFRA Response

for Energy Delivery
HV Winding Responses

for Energy Delivery
Short Circuit Responses

for Energy Delivery
Phase A All Responses

for Energy Delivery
Analysis Strategies
Trace Comparison
Baseline Data
Sister Unit Data
Phase
Case Study Comparison

Identify Known Failure Mechanisms
Expected Characteristic Comparison

Identify Any Unexpected Behavior

for Energy Delivery
Trace Comparison
Baseline Data
The comparison of baseline data provides the most effective
method for determining change. SFRA traces for a given
measurement should overlay. Magnetization of the core may
affect the comparison at low frequencies.
Sister Unit Data

Sister data should overlay well. Some variation may exist at
higher frequencies (> 500 kHz), however the respective traces
should be similar. Low frequencies are also influenced by
magnetization.
Phase Data
Subjective - Is not always effective in some cases.

for Energy Delivery
Baseline Data (Date and Test System)
-20
-30
-40
-50
dB
-60
-70
-80
4 5
10 10
Frequency - Hz

for Energy Delivery
Baseline Data (Zoom 50 kHz - 500 kHz)
-20
-30
-40
-50
dB
-60
-70
-80
5
10
Frequency - Hz

for Energy Delivery
Sister Unit Comparison
-10
-20
-30
-40
-50
dB
-60
-70
-80
-90
-100
2 3 4 5 6
10 10 10 10 10
Frequency - Hz

for Energy Delivery
Phase Data (Good Comparison)
-10
-20
-30
-40
dB
-50
-60
-70
-80
2 3 4 5 6
10 10 10 10 10
Frequency - Hz

for Energy Delivery
Phase Data (Fair Comparison)
-20
-30
-40
-50
-60
dB
-70
-80
-90
-100
4 5 6
10 10 10
Frequency - Hz

for Energy Delivery
Phase Data (Poor Comparison)
-10
-20
-30
-40
-50
dB
-60
-70
-80
-90
-100
4 5 6
10 10 10
Frequency - Hz

for Energy Delivery
Phase Comparison Determination
How do we know that poor phase comparison may

be normal?
By assuming that new two sister units are in good
condition. If two sister units overlay well, but poor
phase comparison exists, then poor phase comparison
is normal.
General Observation: The center phase has the most
discrepancy.

for Energy Delivery
Sister Units and Poor Phase Comparison
-20
-30
-40
-50
dB
-60
-70
-80
5
10
Frequency - Hz

for Energy Delivery
Sister Units and Poor Phase Comparison
-5
-10
-15
dB
-20
-25
-30
5
10
Frequency - Hz

for Energy Delivery
Design and Configuration
Delta - The transfer function includes all phases for a

given winding. The measurement includes all phases in
a series parallel combination. Example (H1 - H3)
Za||(Zb + Zc)
Wye - Transfer impedance is isolated to the phase of
interest.
Observation - Characteristics for each configuration
can be observed only on HV windings, and they are
isolated to the low to mid frequency range.

for Energy Delivery
Design and Configuration
Delta Wye

for Energy Delivery
Delta and Wye Characteristics
-10
-20
-30
Wye
-40
-50
dB
-60
-70
-80
Delta
-90
-100
2 3 4 5 6
10 10 10 10 10
Frequency - Hz

for Energy Delivery
Influence of Testing Error
Open Circuits
Test Leads (Obvious)
Internal to Specimen* (Appears Capacitive)
Short Circuits
Rarely Occurs
Poor Grounding
Test Leads (Poor or No Connection - Paint)
Bushing Flange* (Floating)
* Not a testing error

for Energy Delivery
Open Circuits
Open circuits caused by faulty test leads produce an

obvious sign, which is best described as an unstable
resistive trace.
Open circuits that occur within the test specimen have a
tendency to be more stable than open circuits within test
leads, because additional distributive RLC elements
within the test specimen provide alternative distributive
return paths, thus creating a different stable transfer
function.

for Energy Delivery
Open Circuit Characteristics
-40
-50
-60
-70
-80
dB
-90
-100
-110
-120
2 3 4 5 6
10 10 10 10 10
Frequency - Hz

for Energy Delivery
Poor Grounding
The trend of poor grounding causes the SFRA scan to

shift in the 300 kHz 500 kHz range.
Since winding scans are collected in groups of three,

poor grounding is easily identified if one of the traces
misbehaves as describe above.
Check test lead ground connections first, then

investigate the bushing flange if necessary.

for Energy Delivery
Poor Grounding - Staged
-5
-10
-15
-20
dB
-25
-30
-35
-40
5 6
10 10
Frequency - Hz

for Energy Delivery
Poor Grounding - Field (4 Cases)
-10
-20
-30
dB
-40
-50
-60
4 5 6
10 10 10
Frequency - Hz

for Energy Delivery
Conclusion
Interpretation of SFRA results is often subjective.

Comparing traces, identifying faults, and verifying to known
expectations are methods for analyzing SFRA data.
Various transfer function characteristics can be associated

with transformer design and test technique.
It is important to understand proper test application. Open

circuits, short circuits, and poor grounding should be
recognized and the source identified.

for Energy Delivery

Sweep Frequency Response Analysis

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Sweep Frequency Response Analysis

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Knowledge Is Power SM

Apparatus Maintenance and Power Management